Add Module level docs by G8XSU · Pull Request #6 · lightningdevkit/vss-client

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU · 2023-07-20T19:00:10Z

Note that crate level doc is mostly a placeholder, more details regarding usage to be documented pre-release.

tnull

Even if we don't want to add a full usage example now, it would be great to spend some words on how we imagine this crate to be used and/or to give a bit more context.

E.g.: What is VSS? Where can we learn more?

tnull · 2023-07-21T08:23:51Z

+use crate::client::VssClient;
+use crate::error::VssError;
+
+/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).


Suggested change
/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

I wanted those brackets to be there, otherwise the sentence seems a bit confusing.
"Implements a thin-client VssClient to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS)."

Ah, but for that you might want to use parentheses rather than brackets?

i am baffled that we have to discuss this.
But i think use of brackets is correct here.
Brackets are used to enclose additional information or comments within a sentence. They are often used for clarification, to add explanations, or to provide context to a particular word or phrase.
in this case, it is providing additional information in the context of the thin-client implementation.

Okay, nevermind. Just looks a bit odd in the rendered docs.

idk, brackets don't look any different in rendered docs than parenthesis. both remain the same.

Brackets are definitely not normally used like this and honestly I thought this was a copy-paste and/or text editor mistake. Where does your reference come from?
Most English writing style guides limit brackets to very specific uses (e.g., https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/faqs/use-brackets). I'd rather use parentheses instead for consistency with these guidelines and all our other docs.

Not that it has to be a source of truth but I repeatedly asked chatgpt for brackets vs parenthesis for this documentation.
Here's what it had to say:
In some cases, parentheses can also be used to enclose additional information within a sentence. However, in the context of your original sentence, using square brackets [ ] is more appropriate and common for several reasons:
Clarity: Square brackets are commonly used to add clarifications, annotations, or meta-information within a sentence. They stand out more and make it clear that the enclosed text is an additional comment or detail.
Technical Context: In many technical contexts, such as programming or documentation, square brackets are often used to indicate optional or placeholder elements, as in [VssClient]. This is a familiar convention in these fields.
While it's not necessarily incorrect to use parentheses in this context, the convention of using square brackets [ ] for annotations or optional elements is more common, especially in technical writing or when providing additional information about a specific term.
But my overarching point is that neither of them is strictly right or wrong in this context. I guess chatgpt seems to agree.

The first point seems to mostly agree with the style guide that I cited other than the the vague "add clarification". Square brackets are used for very specific things as noted there.
The second point doesn't agree with your use. It's talking about optional parameters to commands where the convention is to use square brackets to indicate the optionality. VssClient doesn't fit that description.
Why don't we just avoid the issue entirely by using a normal link?
Implements a [thin-client](VssClient) to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Replaced with '()'

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

G8XSU requested review from jkczyz and tnull July 20, 2023 19:00

G8XSU mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2023
Add VSS Http thin client implementation for get/put/listKeyVersions api's #1
Merged

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 8f791b4 to 31dfb0cCompare July 20, 2023 20:01

G8XSU marked this pull request as ready for review July 20, 2023 21:23

tnull reviewed Jul 21, 2023
View reviewed changes

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 31dfb0c to 9ae97c5Compare July 21, 2023 20:56

tnull approved these changes Jul 24, 2023
View reviewed changes

Add Module level docs
45834cd

G8XSU force-pushed the module-docs branch from 9ae97c5 to 45834cdCompare August 17, 2023 01:03

G8XSU merged commit 3c2de18 into lightningdevkit:mainAug 17, 2023

	/// Implements a thin-client [[`VssClient`]] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).
	/// Implements a thin-client [`VssClient`] to access a hosted instance of Versioned Storage Service (VSS).

Uh oh!

Conversation

G8XSU commented Jul 20, 2023

Uh oh!

tnull left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

G8XSUJul 24, 2023• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jkczyzJul 24, 2023• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

G8XSU commented Jul 20, 2023

Uh oh!

tnull left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

G8XSUJul 24, 2023• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jkczyzJul 24, 2023• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

G8XSUJul 24, 2023•
edited
Loading

jkczyzJul 24, 2023•
edited
Loading

G8XSUJul 24, 2023•
edited
Loading

jkczyzJul 24, 2023•
edited
Loading

G8XSUJul 24, 2023•
edited
Loading

jkczyzJul 24, 2023•
edited
Loading