This repository was archived by the owner on Mar 14, 2023. It is now read-only.
Remove implicit "all" group choice. #381
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Agreed - this feels right to me. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This removes the implicit choice of the "all" group in the explicit reviewer pick. This prevented repositories that have an "all" group from being able to
r? someuser, since it would always just pick from "all".This was regressed in #377, but instead of trying to bring back the previous behavior (where "all" was only included when a group was matched), this just removes "all" altogether. There was a comment at #249 (comment) about this, but the explanation didn't make sense to me. If you say
r? somegroup, I think it should only pick from that group and not include "all".Fixes #380