Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[No ticket] Add "Common Flags" to analyze.md #1236

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 11, 2023

Conversation

gilfaizon
Copy link
Contributor

Overview

This PR ports the existing "Common Flags" table to the analyze doc. There's a link for it, but it was apparently never added!

Acceptance criteria

Nothing breaks, and the usual FOSSA project flags link now works.

Testing plan

You can check this branch out and preview the file, or head to the file below and clicktest the link:

Risks

No risk, doc only.

References

None

Checklist

  • I added tests for this PR's change (or explained in the PR description why tests don't make sense).
  • If this PR introduced a user-visible change, I added documentation into docs/.
  • If this change is externally visible, I updated Changelog.md. If this PR did not mark a release, I added my changes into an # Unreleased section at the top.
  • If I made changes to .fossa.yml or fossa-deps.{json.yml}, I updated docs/references/files/*.schema.json. You may also need to update these if you have added/removed new dependency type (e.g. pip) or analysis target type (e.g. poetry).

@gilfaizon gilfaizon requested a review from a team as a code owner June 29, 2023 22:36
@gilfaizon gilfaizon requested a review from jssblck June 29, 2023 22:36
Changelog.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@gilfaizon gilfaizon merged commit 7101b27 into master Jul 11, 2023
17 checks passed
@gilfaizon gilfaizon deleted the palacio-add_common_flags branch July 11, 2023 15:19
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