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

refactor(lazydocker): replace keybindings table by function instead #1204

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 13, 2024

Conversation

cristobalgvera
Copy link
Contributor

📑 Description

Standardize the keybinding of lazydocker.nvim to be a function instead of an opts table.

Also, it was removed the unnecesary opts.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 10, 2024

Review Checklist

Does this PR follow the [Contribution Guidelines](development guidelines)? Following is a partial checklist:

Proper conventional commit scoping:

  • If you are adding a new plugin, the scope would be the name of the category it is being added into. ex. feat(utility): added noice.nvim plugin

  • If you are modifying a pre-existing plugin or pack, the scope would be the name of the plugin folder. ex. fix(noice-nvim): fix LSP handler error

  • Pull request title has the appropriate conventional commit type and scope where the scope is the name of the pre-existing directory in the project as described above

  • README is properly formatted and uses fenced in links with <url> unless they are inside a [title](url)

  • Entry returns a single plugin spec with the new plugin as the only top level spec (not applicable for recipes or packs).

  • Proper usage of opts table rather than setting things up with the config function.

  • Proper usage of specs table for all specs that are not dependencies of a given plugin (not applicable for recipes or packs).

@cristobalgvera cristobalgvera changed the title refactor(lazydocker): replace opts table by function instead refactor(lazydocker): replace keybindings table by function instead Sep 10, 2024
@Uzaaft
Copy link
Member

Uzaaft commented Sep 11, 2024

I dont see why would we do this?

cc @AstroNvim/astrocommunity-maintainers

@ALameLlama
Copy link
Member

It would be nice to have it "Standardize" so all plugins use the same method imo

@mehalter mehalter merged commit bc99921 into AstroNvim:main Sep 13, 2024
14 checks passed
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.

5 participants