Skip to content

Conversation

@PeterJCLaw
Copy link
Member

Suggest review by commit.

This page biases towards supervisors reading it, which is fine,
however may make it harder to interpret for competitors. This change
calls out upfront what a competitor should do to get access in
order to avoid confusion.
@ShadowLord2005
Copy link
Contributor

The last sentence on Line 50 doesn't quite read right, think there needs to be an are in there

@PeterJCLaw
Copy link
Member Author

PeterJCLaw commented Jan 20, 2025

The last sentence on Line 50 doesn't quite read right, think there needs to be an are in there

Nice! e55c474

Meta: not sure if you're aware, but it's possible to comment on files in the diff as well as lines. Doing that means we get an inline conversation thread which can be resolved in the usual way, albeit at the top of the file rather than on a line of the file. It's handy for things like this which are outside the diff.

image

@ShadowLord2005
Copy link
Contributor

Meta: not sure if you're aware, but it's possible to comment on files in the diff as well as lines. Doing that means we get an inline conversation thread which can be resolved in the usual way, albeit at the top of the file rather than on a line of the file. It's handy for things like this which are outside the diff.

Wasn't aware of that no, Still learning my way around GitHub. At some point I should probably clone some of the SR repos if only to be better able to review PRs

Copy link
Contributor

@ShadowLord2005 ShadowLord2005 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Everything looks good to me now.

@PeterJCLaw PeterJCLaw merged commit 3dc077a into main Jan 20, 2025
6 checks passed
@PeterJCLaw PeterJCLaw deleted the discord-updates branch January 20, 2025 19:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants