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

fix "forwarding" typo in RemoteInstructions component #5411

Merged

Conversation

Laurent2916
Copy link
Contributor

@Laurent2916 Laurent2916 commented Jan 20, 2025

What changes are proposed in this pull request?

typo: forwaring -> forwarding

(you could probably setup a typo checker: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos)

Release Notes

Is this a user-facing change that should be mentioned in the release notes?

  • No. You can skip the rest of this section.
  • Yes. Give a description of this change to be included in the release notes for FiftyOne users.

What areas of FiftyOne does this PR affect?

  • App: FiftyOne application changes
  • Build: Build and test infrastructure changes
  • Core: Core fiftyone Python library changes
  • Documentation: FiftyOne documentation changes
  • Other

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Fixed a typo in the comment related to port forwarding instructions, improving clarity for users.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 20, 2025

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

Walkthrough

The pull request involves a minor correction in the Setup.tsx file, specifically fixing a typographical error in a comment related to port forwarding instructions. This change is purely cosmetic and does not impact the functional aspects of the code.

Changes

File Change Summary
app/packages/app/src/components/Setup.tsx Corrected typo in comment from "port forwaring" to "port forwarding"

Possibly related PRs

  • fix typo #5078: Another typo fix in CustomPanel.tsx, demonstrating a similar focus on improving code clarity through spelling corrections

Poem

🐰 A rabbit's keen eye did spy
A typo lurking, oh my!
"Forwaring" was not quite right
So "forwarding" came into light
Precision hops with glee today! 🔍


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between cd326e0 and 77410fe.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • app/packages/app/src/components/Setup.tsx (1 hunks)

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@brimoor brimoor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

@brimoor brimoor merged commit cd1cfe8 into voxel51:develop Jan 20, 2025
2 of 3 checks passed
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 20, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.20%. Comparing base (b2037ac) to head (77410fe).
Report is 458 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #5411    +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage    99.19%   99.20%            
=========================================
  Files           51       54     +3     
  Lines        18503    18635   +132     
=========================================
+ Hits         18354    18486   +132     
  Misses         149      149            
Flag Coverage Δ
python 99.20% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

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