Discussion should be in GH Org - #217
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #217 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 10 10
Lines 437 437
Branches 17 17
=========================================
Hits 437 437
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
psf-chronographer
Bot
added
the
bot:chronographer:provided
Vizonex
left a comment
Vizonex
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good Let's see what others have to say about this.
webknjaz
left a comment
webknjaz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we shouldn't send people to the org-global discussions in general. Most things should be attached to repos.
|
@aiolibsbot fix |
Confidence Score: 5/5The PR appears safe to merge. No blocking failure remains. Reviews (2): Last reviewed commit: "Update discussion links from defunct Goo..." | Re-trigger Greptile |
The Google Group has been archived. Point users to the repo-specific GitHub Discussions instead, per review feedback. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
@webknjaz Rebased and ready for review/merge Apologies for the delay |
3 participants
What do these changes do?
The Google Group has been archived, GitHub Discussions are not enabled in this repo.
Just a few small docs updates I noticed when looking round the repo
Are there changes in behavior for the user?
N/A
Related issue number
N/A
Checklist