Use name placeholder instead of an arbitrary value for storage name #125954
+1
−1
Conversation
This file contains 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
This version is less likely to confuse the users and is more consistent with the rest of the doc. I think when the documentation was written the included storage account name should have been replaced with the <STORAGE_NAME> placeholder. I presume it was simply forgotten or is an artifact of an old version of the documentation
|
@matdube : Thanks for your contribution! The author(s) have been notified to review your proposed change. |
|
Learn Build status updates of commit 35b6dad: ✅ Validation status: passed
For more details, please refer to the build report. For any questions, please:
|
|
Can you review the proposed changes? Important: When the changes are ready for publication, adding a #label:"aq-pr-triaged" |
prmerger-automator
bot
added
the
aq-pr-triaged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This version is less likely to confuse the users and is more consistent with the rest of the doc.
I think when the documentation was written the included storage account name should have been replaced with the <STORAGE_NAME> placeholder. I presume it was simply forgotten or is an artifact of an old version of the documentation