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

Incorrect order for positional arguments in docs generation #1140

Closed
parthea opened this issue Dec 15, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1141
Closed

Incorrect order for positional arguments in docs generation #1140

parthea opened this issue Dec 15, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1141
Assignees
Labels
type: docs Improvement to the documentation for an API.

Comments

@parthea
Copy link
Contributor

parthea commented Dec 15, 2020

PR #1135 reduced the noise in the docs generation by sorting args in alphabetical order however a regression was introduced in the docs where positional arguments were also sorted. It should be a quick fix to exclude positional arguments from being sorted.

@parthea parthea added the type: docs Improvement to the documentation for an API. label Dec 15, 2020
@parthea parthea self-assigned this Dec 15, 2020
gcf-merge-on-green bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 16, 2020
Thank you for opening a Pull Request! Before submitting your PR, there are a few things you can do to make sure it goes smoothly:
- [x] Make sure to open an issue as a [bug/issue](https://github.com/googleapis/google-api-python-client/issues/new/choose) before writing your code!  That way we can discuss the change, evaluate designs, and agree on the general idea
- [x] Ensure the tests and linter pass
- [x] Code coverage does not decrease (if any source code was changed)
- [x] Appropriate docs were updated (if necessary)

Fixes #1140  🦕
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: docs Improvement to the documentation for an API.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant