Fix inconsistency between gRPC function/type names #3285
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mx-psi
approved these changes
May 25, 2021
euniceek
force-pushed
the
config-package-function-names
branch
from
449eafb
to
5f433d3
Compare
tigrannajaryan
approved these changes
Jun 8, 2021
|
Thank you @eunice98k |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description:
This PR is one of the 3 PRs working to address the issue: Reviewing and Improving config package.
Main changes that were made in this PR was to ensure types and function names with
grpcis consistent throughout. For exported functions and types, changes were made such thatGRPCis used. As for unexported functions and types,gRPCis now used.Link to tracking Issue:
Addresses part of #3051