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

Renamed method to check if file is accessible (CheckFileIsAccessible) #248

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

lobis
Copy link
Member

@lobis lobis commented Jun 13, 2022

lobis Medium: 154

This is part of the code originally presented in #239.

It contains minor changes and a renamed method CheckFileIsAccessible and some minor formatting.

Method is added at e44b616.

@lobis lobis requested review from jgalan, nkx111, juanangp and a team June 13, 2022 18:44
@lobis lobis requested a review from a team June 13, 2022 19:22
@lobis lobis self-assigned this Jun 13, 2022
@lobis lobis changed the title Add method to check if file is accessible Renamed method to check if file is accessible (CheckFileIsAccessible) Jun 13, 2022
@juanangp
Copy link
Member

Do you understand why the pipeline is failing? I guess due to the changes on rest-for-physics/restG4#52

@lobis
Copy link
Member Author

lobis commented Jun 13, 2022

Do you understand why the pipeline is failing? I guess due to the changes on rest-for-physics/restG4#52

don't think so since rest-for-physics/restG4#51 was merged afterwards, probably this is the cause, but I think these changes should pass the pipeline

@lobis
Copy link
Member Author

lobis commented Jun 13, 2022

The problems in the pipeline are due to changes to the validation files implemented in rest-for-physics/restG4#51, my bad :(

I will make a PR to fix this, but this PR can be safely merge.

@jgalan jgalan closed this Jun 13, 2022
@lobis lobis deleted the lobis-fix-restG4-pipeline branch June 15, 2022 10:12
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.

3 participants