-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 412
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
Exported Servant.Links.addQueryParam #1785
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
-- NOTE: If you are writing a custom 'HasLink' instance, and need to manipulate | ||
-- the 'Link' (adding query params or fragments, perhaps), please use the the | ||
-- 'addQueryParam' and 'addSegment' functions. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good Note, thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@tchoutri should we also export addSegment
? Which would force one to also export Fragment'
? Is there any reason why one would be extending / modifying this behaviour?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not in this PR, I would like to take the time to think about a different module to export these "unsafe" modifiers for Links.
@saurabhnanda Thanks a lot for this! Could you please add a new changelog entry in the |
@tchoutri I had created a branch from
|
@saurabhnanda changelog-d has been around for quite some time, if I'm not mistaken. Regarding the GHC deprecations: yes they are intended, see #1778. You will need to update the Stack setup to use the LTS of 9.6.6. |
32ad73d
to
130715a
Compare
@tchoutri added the changelog entry - hope it's fine. |
packages: servant | ||
prs: #1785 | ||
issues: #1232 | ||
significance: minor |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@fgaz remind me, is minor
a valid value for the significance
field?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, we only have significance: significant
or omitted
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@tchoutri btw the docs are here: https://codeberg.org/fgaz/changelog-d
130715a
to
221af27
Compare
Closes #1232