joerghoh commented on PR #38:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-clients/pull/38#issuecomment-1270592706
@enapps-enorman It's fine for me if we move the example you have given above
into the readme. It's just that I don't want to loose that snippet here in the
gi
enapps-enorman commented on PR #38:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-clients/pull/38#issuecomment-1270482796
> I wouldn't mind if we keep this functionality, even if it is just a thin
wrapper around `Awaitility`.
@joerghoh I won't stand in the way of that
sonarcloud[bot] commented on PR #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-caconfig-integration-tests/pull/1#issuecomment-1270465220
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed! [![Quality Gate
passed](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/Qu
sonarcloud[bot] commented on PR #2:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-auth-xing-oauth/pull/2#issuecomment-1270407008
SonarCloud Quality Gate failed. [![Quality Gate
failed](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/QualityGateBadge/fai
sonarcloud[bot] commented on PR #2:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-auth-xing-login/pull/2#issuecomment-1270405967
SonarCloud Quality Gate failed. [![Quality Gate
failed](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/QualityGateBadge/fai
joerghoh commented on PR #38:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-clients/pull/38#issuecomment-1270348482
I wouldn't mind if we keep this functionality, even if it is just a thin
wrapper around ```Awaitility```.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Gi
nscendoni commented on PR #38:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-clients/pull/38#issuecomment-1270290792
@enapps-enorman Yes, I can use Awaitility without modifying
sling-testing-clients and the code is compact and clean.
You can either close this pull reques