Skip to content

refactor: rename nav schematic to navigation #18364

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

Merged

Conversation

devversion
Copy link
Member

Our docs often describe the nav schematic as navigation schematics,
and it's not quite clear what the actual schematic name is. To avoid
this confusion, we just name it navigation, but keep support for
the old nav abbreviation.

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement label Feb 1, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@Splaktar Splaktar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I had some initial misgivings with this approach, but it does seem to better align with our overall schematic naming scheme. LGTM

@devversion devversion marked this pull request as ready for review February 1, 2020 22:20
@devversion devversion requested a review from jelbourn as a code owner February 1, 2020 22:20
@devversion devversion added pr: merge safe target: patch This PR is targeted for the next patch release labels Feb 1, 2020
Copy link
Member

@crisbeto crisbeto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@crisbeto crisbeto added pr: lgtm action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker labels Feb 2, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@IgorMinar IgorMinar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wouldn't this be a breaking change for anyone referencing nav in blog posts or videos?

@devversion
Copy link
Member Author

@IgorMinar I made it so that nav is still supported. Just navigation is now supported, and the default/primary name. Does that make sense to you?

@IgorMinar
Copy link
Contributor

@devversion Ok that sound great!

Our docs often describe the `nav` schematic as `navigation` schematics,
and it's not quite clear what the actual schematic name is. To avoid
this confusion, we just name it `navigation`, but keep support for
the old `nav` abbreviation.
@devversion devversion force-pushed the fix/nav-schematic-allow-navigation-name branch from 472c3d3 to 9a8f13c Compare February 3, 2020 08:48
@mmalerba mmalerba merged commit 447ca71 into angular:master Feb 4, 2020
mmalerba pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 5, 2020
Our docs often describe the `nav` schematic as `navigation` schematics,
and it's not quite clear what the actual schematic name is. To avoid
this confusion, we just name it `navigation`, but keep support for
the old `nav` abbreviation.
yifange pushed a commit to yifange/components that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2020
Our docs often describe the `nav` schematic as `navigation` schematics,
and it's not quite clear what the actual schematic name is. To avoid
this confusion, we just name it `navigation`, but keep support for
the old `nav` abbreviation.
@angular-automatic-lock-bot
Copy link

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

This action has been performed automatically by a bot.

@angular-automatic-lock-bot angular-automatic-lock-bot bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 6, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement target: patch This PR is targeted for the next patch release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants