You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Describe the bug
When submitting a review (on GitHub) with both regular comments and reply comments, an error is thrown and the reply comments are lost (they do not show up on GitHub, and they disappear from the code-review interface).
The error is:
error in process filter: code-review-github-errback: Wrong type argument: characterp, (resource . "PullRequestReviewComment")
error in process filter: Wrong type argument: characterp, (resource . "PullRequestReviewComment")
To Reproduce
Start a code review on which there are already some comments
Add some comments with code-review-comment-add-or-edit
Add some reply comments by calling code-review-comment-add-or-edit on existing comments
Expected behavior
Ideally both reply comments and regular comments should be submitted. If only regular comments are submitted, though, the reply comments should at least be kept to avoid losing work so that they can then be submitted individually with code-review-submit-only-replies
Screenshots
N/A
Desktop (please complete the following information):
Describe the bug
When submitting a review (on GitHub) with both regular comments and reply comments, an error is thrown and the reply comments are lost (they do not show up on GitHub, and they disappear from the
code-review
interface).The error is:
To Reproduce
code-review-comment-add-or-edit
code-review-comment-add-or-edit
on existing commentsExpected behavior
Ideally both reply comments and regular comments should be submitted. If only regular comments are submitted, though, the reply comments should at least be kept to avoid losing work so that they can then be submitted individually with
code-review-submit-only-replies
Screenshots
N/A
Desktop (please complete the following information):
ca3858563c7ba8ee3caa82fbd2b7c386ea60c0d3
Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: