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

Use archived? instead of ems_id.nil? #15633

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 27, 2017
Merged

Conversation

zakiva
Copy link
Contributor

@zakiva zakiva commented Jul 24, 2017

We don't nullify ems_id for archived containers entities anymore, so instead of checking ems_id.nil? before disconnecting we should use the archived? method that checks whether deleted_on is nil.

@zakiva
Copy link
Contributor Author

zakiva commented Jul 24, 2017

@miq-bot add_label providers/containers

@zakiva
Copy link
Contributor Author

zakiva commented Jul 24, 2017

@simon3z @cben @zeari @Ladas Please review

@chessbyte chessbyte changed the title Use archvied? instead of ems_id.nil? Use archived? instead of ems_id.nil? Jul 24, 2017
@chessbyte chessbyte requested a review from Ladas July 24, 2017 15:34
@chessbyte chessbyte self-assigned this Jul 24, 2017
@chessbyte chessbyte added the bug label Jul 24, 2017
Copy link
Contributor

@Ladas Ladas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great 👍

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jul 26, 2017

This pull request is not mergeable. Please rebase and repush.

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jul 26, 2017

Checked commit zakiva@81c1848 with ruby 2.2.6, rubocop 0.47.1, and haml-lint 0.20.0
4 files checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks fine. 🍪

@chessbyte chessbyte merged commit c3e24ed into ManageIQ:master Jul 27, 2017
@chessbyte chessbyte added this to the Sprint 66 Ending Aug 7, 2017 milestone Jul 27, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants