-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
📖 Clarify CAPI vs conformance #12961
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
📖 Clarify CAPI vs conformance #12961
Conversation
|
/lgtm @fabriziopandini ptal at the broken markdown links |
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: d6af984e3eb75bc6ac4718c62721143684b477a0
|
238e627 to
1dca12f
Compare
|
Thx, still have to fix the broken links though :) (the markdown check on PRs only checks changed files, that's why they are showing up now. I have no clue why the weekly scan doesn't find these issues) |
1dca12f to
e160cdf
Compare
|
@sbueringer fixed, PTAL |
e160cdf to
a0b4ad7
Compare
|
/lgtm |
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 4ac62319aaab4bc733650a4cd95171161774becb
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: sbueringer The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Follow up of yesterday's office hours discussion + included also an improvement on usage of CAPI as a library and forks, because this popped up in some issues
/area documentation