symfony/symfony-docsPublic

NotificationsYou must be signed in to change notification settings
Fork5.3k
Star2.3k

Added the docs for the @dns-sensitive mocks#6388

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Closed

javiereguiluz wants to merge3 commits intosymfony:masterfromjaviereguiluz:fix_6379

Closed

Added the docs for the @dns-sensitive mocks#6388

javiereguiluz wants to merge3 commits intosymfony:masterfromjaviereguiluz:fix_6379

Conversation

Copy link

Member

javiereguiluz commentedMar 20, 2016

Thisfixes#6379.

Added the docs for the @dns-sensitive mocks

55a4e9d

HeahDude reviewed

Mar 24, 2016

View reviewed changes

components/phpunit_bridge.rst Outdated

		---------------

		The ``@group time-sensitive`` and ``@group dns-sensitive`` annotations work
		"by convention" and assumes that the namespace of the tested class can be

Copy link

Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

typo "assume" ?

Copy link

Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

missingversionadded

xabbuh added the Status: Needs Work label

Mar 25, 2016

Fixes proposed by reviewers

6736bee

Copy link

MemberAuthor

javiereguiluz commentedMar 29, 2016

I've changed everything reviewers suggested. I also agree with@stof and we should split this doc as soon as we try to add the explanation of a new feature.

Copy link

MemberAuthor

javiereguiluz commentedApr 1, 2016

Ready for the final review before merge. Thanks!

Copy link

Member

xabbuh commentedApr 1, 2016

👍

xabbuh added Status: Reviewed and removed Status: Needs Work labels

Apr 1, 2016

Copy link

Member

stof commentedApr 1, 2016

we should split this doc as soon as we try to add the explanation of a new feature.

As this PR is adding explanations of new features, I would say it is time 😄

Copy link

MemberAuthor

javiereguiluz commentedApr 1, 2016

@stof I was referring to new explanations after this feature 😁

Copy link

Member

I am 👍 for merging this as is. If someone feels the need to split the component's documentation with this feature set, we can discuss that in a new PR, but don't block merging this one because of a new discussion.