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: avoid details route conflicting with count when overriding details route #211

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 3, 2021

Conversation

jeffladiray
Copy link
Member

Pull Request checklist:

  • Write an explicit title for the Pull Request, following Conventional Commits specification
  • Create automatic tests
  • Test manually the implemented changes
  • Review my own code (syntax, style, simplicity, readability)

@jeffladiray jeffladiray self-assigned this Aug 2, 2021
@jeffladiray jeffladiray marked this pull request as ready for review August 2, 2021 13:05
Copy link
Contributor

@guillaumedeslandes guillaumedeslandes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Detail route code properly executed.

@jeffladiray jeffladiray changed the title fix: fix details route conflicting with count when overriding details route fix: avoid details route conflicting with count when overriding details route Aug 3, 2021
@jeffladiray jeffladiray merged commit 0060bfd into master Aug 3, 2021
@jeffladiray jeffladiray deleted the fix/count-route-conflict branch August 3, 2021 07:35
forest-bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 3, 2021
## [2.2.5](v2.2.4...v2.2.5) (2021-08-03)

### Bug Fixes

* avoid details route conflicting with count when overriding details route ([#211](#211)) ([0060bfd](0060bfd))
@forest-bot
Copy link
Member

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.2.5 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants