Skip to content

docs: base url relative join #1013

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 12, 2025
Merged

docs: base url relative join #1013

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 12, 2025

Conversation

tisonkun
Copy link
Contributor

@tisonkun tisonkun commented Dec 28, 2024

I encountered this case today and have to check the behavior by myself.

A doctest would be helpful for downstream users to get the behavior quickly.

@tisonkun
Copy link
Contributor Author

This should close #333.

@tisonkun tisonkun mentioned this pull request Apr 12, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 12, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Please upload report for BASE (main@2ce2e12). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1013   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   79.87%           
=======================================
  Files           ?       24           
  Lines           ?     4327           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?     3456           
  Misses          ?      871           
  Partials        ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@valenting valenting added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 12, 2025
Merged via the queue into servo:main with commit 968e862 Apr 12, 2025
18 checks passed
@tisonkun tisonkun deleted the patch-1 branch April 13, 2025 03:21
@Manishearth
Copy link
Member

I do think some prose would also be warranted here, explaining this issue. Perhaps this can be done holistically with #934, having each function get clear documentation on behavior

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.

4 participants