feat. quote #31
Merged
feat. quote #31
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
could you resolve merge conflict?? if you do, I will approve it |
|
Yes, I will resolve the merge conflict. |
33 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of Changes
Here is reference: #25
support 'quote block' block
-> add custom solution for rendering 'Quote block'
Review point
Should we integrate an existing solution or use a custom implementation for 'Quote block'?
To reproduce
Screenshot
Review Guide
Reviews are conducted based on priority levels, such as p0, p1, p2, p3, p4, and p5.
p0 ~ p2: If the author decides not to reflect a review for p0 to p2, it signals that a proper discussion with the reviewer is
necessary. It is expected that the review will be resolved either through incorporating the feedback or through further discussion.
p3: indicates that the reviewer has identified a significant issue, but either lacks a clear solution or the comment lacks sufficient context. Further explanation or additional discussion on the reviewer's concerns is needed.
p4, p5: p4 and p5 suggest low priority, and if the author does not deem them important, these comments can be disregarded.