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

doc: correct async_hooks resource names #24001

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

doc: correct async_hooks resource names #24001

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Flarna
Copy link
Member

@Flarna Flarna commented Oct 31, 2018

Correct async hools resource names to match the implementation:
FSREQWRAP => FSREQCALLBACK
TCPSERVER => TCPSERVERWRAP

Refs: #21971
Refs: #17157

Checklist

Correct async hools resource names to match the implementation:
`FSREQWRAP` => `FSREQCALLBACK`
`TCPSERVER` => `TCPSERVERWRAP`

Refs: #21971
Refs: #17157
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added async_hooks Issues and PRs related to the async hooks subsystem. doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. labels Oct 31, 2018
@vsemozhetbyt
Copy link
Contributor

@vsemozhetbyt vsemozhetbyt added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Oct 31, 2018
@vsemozhetbyt
Copy link
Contributor

Landed in 7181531
Thank you!

pull bot pushed a commit to SimenB/node that referenced this pull request Nov 2, 2018
Correct async hooks resource names to match the implementation:
`FSREQWRAP` => `FSREQCALLBACK`
`TCPSERVER` => `TCPSERVERWRAP`

PR-URL: nodejs#24001
Refs: nodejs#21971
Refs: nodejs#17157
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
@Flarna Flarna deleted the fix_async_hooks_doc branch November 2, 2018 21:53
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2018
Correct async hooks resource names to match the implementation:
`FSREQWRAP` => `FSREQCALLBACK`
`TCPSERVER` => `TCPSERVERWRAP`

PR-URL: #24001
Refs: #21971
Refs: #17157
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

Should this be backported to v10.x-staging? If yes please follow the guide and raise a backport PR, if not let me know or add the dont-land-on label.

@Flarna
Copy link
Member Author

Flarna commented Nov 27, 2018

it's only partial applicable (TCPSERVER => TCPSERVERWRAP) but this is also applicable to v8.x. Will create a PR later for 10.x
Regarding labels: I have no rights to set/clear them.

@Flarna
Copy link
Member Author

Flarna commented Nov 27, 2018

Created backport PRs for v10 (#24683) and v8 (#24684).
I was not able to follow the guideline till the end as I have no rights to start CI.

BethGriggs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 3, 2018
Correct async hooks resource names to match the implementation:
`TCPSERVER` => `TCPSERVERWRAP`

Refs: #17157

PR-URL: #24684
Refs: #17157
Refs: #24001
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <Bethany.Griggs@uk.ibm.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2018
Correct async hooks resource names to match the implementation:
`TCPSERVER` => `TCPSERVERWRAP`

Backport-PR-URL: #24683
PR-URL: #24001
Refs: #21971
Refs: #17157
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 26, 2018
Correct async hooks resource names to match the implementation:
`TCPSERVER` => `TCPSERVERWRAP`

Backport-PR-URL: #24683
PR-URL: #24001
Refs: #21971
Refs: #17157
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
@codebytere codebytere mentioned this pull request Jan 4, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
async_hooks Issues and PRs related to the async hooks subsystem. author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants