IBX-11951: Removed ConfigResolver as unused implementation#764
IBX-11951: Removed ConfigResolver as unused implementation#764Steveb-p wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
…ase and updated references.
…vice definitions.
|
Steveb-p
changed the title
ibexa-workflow-automation-1
Bot
requested review from
ViniTou,
alongosz,
barw4,
bnowak,
ciastektk,
konradoboza,
mikadamczyk,
tbialcz and
wiewiurdp
and removed request for
a team
konradoboza
left a comment
konradoboza
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But proper sanities and potential doc usage scan is needed if we aim for 5.0.
| * Make sure returned resource lists are not sorted as ResourceProvider is sorting them | ||
| * | ||
| * @return \Ibexa\Contracts\Core\SiteAccess\ConfigResolverInterface|\PHPUnit\Framework\MockObject\MockObject | ||
| * @return \Ibexa\Contracts\Core\SiteAccess\ConfigResolverInterface&\PHPUnit\Framework\MockObject\MockObject |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we move this to native return type instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did not want to introduce a return type, because this class can potentially be used elsewhere. I've checked throughout the codebase and did not find it though. Do we want to do it @konradoboza / @alongosz ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought we just wanted to have here:
protected function getConfigResolverMock(): ConfigResolverInterface & MockObject
What exactly do you have in mind?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did not want to introduce a return type, because this class can potentially be used elsewhere. I've checked throughout the codebase and did not find it though. Do we want to do it @konradoboza / @alongosz ?
If you haven't found anything, then it's rather safe.
8 participants
Description:
ConfigResolverwas not actually used.For QA:
Documentation: