Skip to content

Conversation

@v1gnesh
Copy link
Collaborator

@v1gnesh v1gnesh commented Dec 16, 2025

is it right? What will Augment say?

is it right?

Signed-off-by: v1gnesh <[email protected]>
@v1gnesh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

v1gnesh commented Dec 19, 2025

augment review

@augmentcode
Copy link

augmentcode bot commented Dec 19, 2025

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Updates the vendored patch dev-patches/PR1/releasenamecollision.patch by changing the negotiated fetch struct name.


Changes: Renames struct fetch_negotiator to struct fetch_nogotiator within the patch text (likely intended to address a naming/collision concern).

🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎

Copy link

@augmentcode augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Review completed. 1 suggestions posted.

Comment augment review to trigger a new review at any time.

+ * cannot be used (unless reinitialized with fetch_negotiator_init()).
*/
struct fetch_negotiator {
struct fetch_nogotiator {
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

struct fetch_nogotiator looks like a misspelling and is inconsistent with the rest of this patch, which still refers to struct fetch_negotiator (e.g., function pointer types below). As-is, the patch will likely fail to apply cleanly or will fail to compile after application due to the type-name mismatch.

🤖 Was this useful? React with 👍 or 👎

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