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

Add CaptionML in CaptionIsMissing check LC0016 #627

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 25, 2024

Conversation

ans-bar-bm
Copy link
Contributor

fixes #626

Simple fix attempt by adding CaptionML in the CaptionIsMissing check.
As described in the issue if "allowing" CaptionML is not wanted since afaik it should not be used anymore, then maybe checking if the field is an extension of a field "owned" by the base object would be possible? (I have no idea how one would implement that tho)

@ans-bar-bm ans-bar-bm changed the title Add CaptionML in CaptionIsMissing check Add CaptionML in CaptionIsMissing check LC0016 May 24, 2024
@Arthurvdv Arthurvdv changed the base branch from master to prerelease May 25, 2024 08:24
@Arthurvdv Arthurvdv changed the base branch from prerelease to master May 25, 2024 08:29
@Arthurvdv Arthurvdv changed the base branch from master to prerelease May 25, 2024 08:29
@Arthurvdv Arthurvdv merged commit c09d39d into StefanMaron:prerelease May 25, 2024
33 checks passed
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.

LC0016 raised on extension fields where base field uses CaptionML
2 participants