-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 918
Bump PHPStan version #2267
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
Bump PHPStan version #2267
Conversation
and fix a mistake in a readme
Let's wait for @soyuka review regarding the Doctrine part. |
We should ask @Simperfit instead it's his code and I'm also not sure to what it fixes 😆 |
at least if we need to keep it I'll update the tests because even it is tested, dropping this code doesn't make the test suite failing... |
I don't think that these are useful and they just look like copy/paste to me (that said I'd be totally in favor of dropping the lines) |
ok this was needed as long as we supported doctrine/orm 2.2 so basically means api-platform 1.x |
Thanks @antograssiot! |
@dunglas @soyuka I've a working branch based on 2.3 passing PHPStan level 6, is it something you're interested in or would it make community contributions harder? |
It's something we're definitely interested in! |
Are you sure it was not my code? 😝 (I think the commit history was lost when we moved to this repository...) |
@teohhanhui the PR targeted 2.3 (which is stable to me) and will land into master when 2.3 will get merged inside or did I miss something ? |
Oops... Sorry, I must have misread. 🙈 |
and fix a mistake in a readme
Instead of adding a new exclude rule, I would rather drop this code and in other places in the QueryJoinParser. Those are public method that didn't moved since 6 years and are still there in the next 3.0, I fail to understand what it is trying to fix and why if the method is to be removed at some point, we expect the internal property to still be there.
let me know if it is ok