rspec/rules/S4601/java/comments-and-links.adoc

=== on 19 Apr 2018, 15:54:57 Ann Campbell wrote:
\[~alexandre.gigleux] you're only going to raise an issue if ``++**/++`` is already included in the list, right? Current wording leaves it open to raising an issue when ``++**/++`` is not in the  list at all.
Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 19 Apr 2018, 15:54:57 Ann Campbell wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			\[~alexandre.gigleux] you're only going to raise an issue if ``++/++`` is already included in the list, right? Current wording leaves it open to raising an issue when ``++/++`` is not in the list at all.