Skip to content

unify PROVIDER var in examples on the debug-callback page #560

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

Conversation

kubenstein
Copy link
Contributor

@kubenstein kubenstein commented Jan 14, 2025

Description

Unify PROVIDER bash variable name across example code snippets on /entropy/debug-callback-failures page.

One code snippet uses PROVIDER_ADDRESS bash variable instead of PROVIDER which is defined earlier on the page.

Let's unify those variables for better copy-pastability.

Type of Change

  • New Page
  • Page update/improvement
  • Fix typo/grammar
  • Restructure/reorganize content
  • Update links/references
  • Other (please describe):

Areas Affected

  • /entropy/debug-callback-failures

Checklist

  • I ran pre-commit run --all-files to check for linting errors
  • I have reviewed my changes for clarity and accuracy
  • All links are valid and working
  • Images (if any) are properly formatted and include alt text
  • Code examples (if any) are complete and functional
  • Content follows the established style guide
  • Changes are properly formatted in Markdown
  • Preview renders correctly in development environment

Contributor Information

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 14, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
docs ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Feb 3, 2025 10:05pm
documentation ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Feb 3, 2025 10:05pm

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 14, 2025

@kubenstein is attempting to deploy a commit to the Pyth Network Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

@aditya520 aditya520 merged commit de65ef1 into pyth-network:main Feb 3, 2025
4 of 5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants