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

docs: fix links in gsoc 2024 ideas document #1065

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

smoya
Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya commented Feb 13, 2024

Description

Please, discard this PR if you think it is wrong.

I saw the links in the list of ideas go to the issues related to the GSOC submitted ideas, but not directly to the issues created in purpose solely for the GSOC (which they also include a link to the original issues) where all is summarized and includes GSOC valuable info.

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ Improve the [AsyncAPI website](https://github.com/asyncapi/website)'s robustness
- 👩🏿‍🏫 **Mentor(s):** [@akshatnema](https://github.com/akshatnema), [@anshgoyalevil](https://github.com/anshgoyalevil)
- ⏳ **Length:** 350 Hours

## 3) [Integration Testing Library for Code Generators](https://github.com/asyncapi/generator/issues/752)
## 3) [Integration Testing Library for Code Generators](https://github.com/postman-open-technologies/gsoc-2024/issues/6)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we should remove it general -> https://github.com/postman-open-technologies/gsoc-2024/issues/6#issuecomment-1941816011

regarding links change, I'm not sure that should be changed. I know Postman applied to GSoC with AsyncAPI and JSON Schema but I hope we also applied separately as AsyncAPI as well, as every year - so these links should not change as I think this document is for AsyncAPI application, not Postman application 🤔

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I do plan on replacing it with one of the ideas an interested mentor is currently drafting

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Gotcha. Now I understand two applications happened. Thanks for clarifying, perhaps a clarification somewhere is needed.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

but I hope we also applied separately as AsyncAPI as well

@derberg yo, did you already forget I sent you the link to this file and told you I had applied for us this year? O_O

@AceTheCreator
Copy link
Member

@smoya I do agree with Lukasz; we shouldn't change the link cuz our application with Postman is a different one entirely :)

@smoya smoya closed this Feb 13, 2024
@smoya smoya deleted the patch-1 branch February 13, 2024 21:21
@quetzalliwrites
Copy link
Member

thanks for explaining to @smoya why we shouldn't use Postman links in our AsyncAPI application! 😸 appreciate it

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.

4 participants