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

Add support for commit status contexts. #96

Closed
farmdawgnation opened this issue Jun 5, 2014 · 5 comments
Closed

Add support for commit status contexts. #96

farmdawgnation opened this issue Jun 5, 2014 · 5 comments

Comments

@farmdawgnation
Copy link
Contributor

The GitHub status API now supports the concept of optional contexts for commit statuses. It would be useful to be able to add those from the Java API for the benefit of things like the GitHub Pull Request builder.

I'm going to try and find some time in the next week to actually work on this. If someone else starts tackling it before I get around to it, please comment here so we're not duplicating work! :)

@suryagaddipati
Copy link
Collaborator

Are you referring to this https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/#get-the-combined-status-for-a-specific-ref

Given that GHE always lags behind. It would be nice to make sure that change works both for GHE and public api.

@farmdawgnation
Copy link
Contributor Author

I was talking about the counterpart for that which creates a status with an additional context parameter in the JSON POST body. That said implementing the retrieval of those should happen too. The context parameter is optional, so the change wouldn't break GHE support of statuses. They just can't take advantage of the feature until it's released on GHE.

That said. It may have already been. This feature came out a few months ago if I recall.

@suryagaddipati
Copy link
Collaborator

Oh ok.I 've noticed that GHE usually lags 7-8 months.

I've opened a pr for adding context
#97

@farmdawgnation
Copy link
Contributor Author

Awesome! Thanks!

@farmdawgnation
Copy link
Contributor Author

Pretty sure this should have been closed with the merging of #97 - not sure why it wasn't.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants