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

Use same lock ID for locks in one batch #669

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 4, 2023

Conversation

sven-urbanski-freiheit-com
Copy link
Contributor

This will be used later to identify locks by ID.

SRX-VMZUKT

Copy link
Member

@hannesg hannesg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Interesting idea. I would have thought that we would just inject the lock id right before we send the batch, just like we are doing it with the lock comment. I think that would be way simpler because we don't have to juggle react states around.

@sven-urbanski-freiheit-com
Copy link
Contributor Author

Interesting idea. I would have thought that we would just inject the lock id right before we send the batch, just like we are doing it with the lock comment. I think that would be way simpler because we don't have to juggle react states around.

I'll try that.

@sven-urbanski-freiheit-com
Copy link
Contributor Author

Interesting idea. I would have thought that we would just inject the lock id right before we send the batch, just like we are doing it with the lock comment. I think that would be way simpler because we don't have to juggle react states around.

I'll try that.

@hannesg I implemented your suggestion, it is indeed much simpler.

@sven-urbanski-freiheit-com sven-urbanski-freiheit-com deleted the su-delete-multiple-locks branch May 4, 2023 08:56
@sven-urbanski-freiheit-com sven-urbanski-freiheit-com restored the su-delete-multiple-locks branch May 5, 2023 08:12
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants