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

fix: Multiple nicknames error fixed. #24

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hanifisenturk
Copy link
Contributor

Hi guys!

I would like to express my gratitude for this remarkable project. It significantly facilitates our ability to manage tasks effortlessly, and I truly appreciate it.

Upon attempting to join multiple rooms, I noticed an issue where assigning a different nickname in one grooming room resulted in the alteration of nicknames across all browser instances. Consequently, this pull request aims to address this particular concern.

In certain instances, I deviated from the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle, notably in the use of the NicknameData types. I refrained from creating a separate file for these types, as it seemed unnecessary for a single type. However, if it is suggested, I am willing to create a dedicated file for types.

Presently, when a user performs create, join, and update nickname operations, the nickname data is stored with the current roomID. This modification enables users to employ distinct nicknames for various grooming rooms.

I would also like to extend my apologies for any inconveniences caused by changes due to Prettier formatting. If you decide to include a configuration file, we can proceed collaboratively in sync.

Additionally, I would like to note that the change in the nickname data type in local storage might impact some users. They may need to clear their storage to ensure proper functionality.

Thank you for your consideration.

Best regards,
Mehmet

@armagandalkiran
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi there! Thank you for your detailed explanation and your kind words about the project. This development looking good to me. I think this behavior of the user is a bit of an edge case. I will merge it after making sure that the complexity in the project will not increase too much. Thank you again !

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.

2 participants