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

docs: clarify relationship between owner and owner_account (again) #2125

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 30, 2021

Conversation

dgw
Copy link
Member

@dgw dgw commented Jun 28, 2021

Description

We were going to make core.owner optional in Sopel 8, but that's not wise. The setting is used to send important notices to the bot's owner, and so it has to be set with a proper value even if core.owner_account is being used for verification (e.g. plugin.require_owner).

Checklist

  • I have read CONTRIBUTING.md
  • I can and do license this contribution under the EFLv2
  • No issues are reported by make qa (runs make quality and make test)
  • I have tested the functionality of the things this change touches

Notes

Can be merged with a [skip ci], as it only touches docs.
Should be cherry-picked back to 7.1.x with a [skip ci] so as not to burn Travis credits.

dgw added 2 commits June 28, 2021 00:39
We were going to make `core.owner` optional in Sopel 8, but that's not
wise. The setting is used to send important notices to the bot's owner,
and so it has to be set with a proper value even if `core.owner_account`
is being used for verification (e.g. `plugin.require_owner`).
@dgw dgw added this to the 7.1.2 milestone Jun 28, 2021
@dgw dgw requested a review from a team June 28, 2021 05:42
Copy link
Contributor

@Exirel Exirel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Inline comment in config example are a problem now. 😭

docs/source/configuration.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Our `ConfigParser` invokation does not allow inline comments, so users
could copy and paste broken snippets with comments as part of the value.

Regardless of whether it's a good idea to enable inline comment support
for Sopel 8, we need clean documentation for the 7.1.x stable branch.
@dgw dgw requested a review from Exirel June 28, 2021 16:30
Copy link
Contributor

@Exirel Exirel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@dgw dgw merged commit 1c2edac into master Jun 30, 2021
@dgw dgw deleted the more-owner-doc-clarification branch June 30, 2021 00:40
dgw added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 30, 2021
Cherry-pick of merge for pull request #2125; taken from the master
branch at 1c2edac
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.

2 participants