rspec/rules/S4583/comments-and-links.adoc

=== on 13 Apr 2018, 15:01:43 Amaury Levé wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2][~duncan.pocklington] Could you please review?

=== on 13 Apr 2018, 20:02:01 Ann Campbell wrote:
\[~amaury.leve] I've edited with the understanding I gleaned from your draft: omitting ``++EndInvoke++`` is not a problem when it is an exception-less, ``++void++`` method that is invoked. If that's not the case, it might be useful to talk through this one.

=== on 16 Apr 2018, 12:01:44 Amaury Levé wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] All good! I updated the code sample and added a link to the Microsoft documentation.
Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 13 Apr 2018, 15:01:43 Amaury Levé wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`\[~ann.campbell.2][~duncan.pocklington] Could you please review?`

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 13 Apr 2018, 20:02:01 Ann Campbell wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			\[~amaury.leve] I've edited with the understanding I gleaned from your draft: omitting ``++EndInvoke++`` is not a problem when it is an exception-less, ``++void++`` method that is invoked. If that's not the case, it might be useful to talk through this one.

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 16 Apr 2018, 12:01:44 Amaury Levé wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`\[~ann.campbell.2] All good! I updated the code sample and added a link to the Microsoft documentation.`