Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

portal/brand: Residential customers should not have the Residential C… #2822

Conversation

R0MANDEV
Copy link
Contributor

…ustomers option

Type Of Change

  • Small bug fix
  • New feature or enhancement
  • Breaking change

Checklist:

  • Commits are named and have tag following commit rules
  • Commits are split per component (schema, portal/platform, kamusers, agis, ..)
  • Changes have been tested locally
  • Fixes an existing issue (Fixes #XXXX)
  • Upport from existing Pull request #XXXX

Description

Additional information

@R0MANDEV R0MANDEV added +bug Bug portal/brand Brand portal labels Nov 18, 2024
@R0MANDEV R0MANDEV requested a review from danigargar November 18, 2024 21:24
@R0MANDEV R0MANDEV self-assigned this Nov 18, 2024
Copy link

@ironArt3mis ironArt3mis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Functional review required

@R0MANDEV R0MANDEV force-pushed the PROVIDER-2092-residential-customers-should-not-have-the-residential-customers-options branch 2 times, most recently from e89a210 to d910268 Compare November 19, 2024 11:10
@R0MANDEV R0MANDEV force-pushed the PROVIDER-2092-residential-customers-should-not-have-the-residential-customers-options branch from d910268 to 4b430d2 Compare November 19, 2024 11:12
@R0MANDEV R0MANDEV merged commit cb85e6d into bleeding Nov 19, 2024
4 checks passed
@R0MANDEV R0MANDEV deleted the PROVIDER-2092-residential-customers-should-not-have-the-residential-customers-options branch November 19, 2024 13:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants