ModeMessage Improvements #86
Closed
opened 2020-05-25 15:52:45 +02:00 by muellerr
·
0 comments
No Branch/Tag Specified
master
spahr/fixCompileError
development
mohr/romeo
development-doc-deployment
development-doc-test0
switch-doc-theme-to-rtd
action-update
obj-manager-tweak
mohr_introspection
mohr/windows
mohr/GCC13
mohr/timetag_fix
mohr/relsease_helper
mohr/warnings
mohr/rtems
mohr/freeRTOS
mueller/new-cfdp-update-with-handlers
mohr/dhb2normal
mueller/obj-man-remove-weird-proc-func
mohr/documentation_ci
mueller/fsfw-from-zero
mueller/data-wrapper
mueller/dhb-handle-device-tm
mueller/refactor-tmtc-stack-with-retval-refactoring
mueller/refactor-logging-with-fmt
meier/upstream-pus-distributor-bugfix
mueller/clang-improvements
docker_d12
docker_d11
docker_d10
v6.0.0
docker_d9
docker_d8
docker_d7
docker_d6
docker_d5
docker_d4
v5.0.0
docker_d3
docker_d2
v4.0.0
docker_d1
v3.0.1
v3.0.0
v2.0.1
v2.0.0
ASTP_1.1.0
ASTP_1.0.0
ASTP_0.0.1
Labels
Clear labels
API Change
Breaking API Change
Documentation
Refactor
Tests
bug
build
cosmetics
duplicate
feature
help wanted
hotfix
invalid
question
wontfix
Changes the API, so Users need to adapted
Changes the API in a non backwards compatible way
Improvement of code documentation
Contains a refactoring of some code
Issues related to testing code
Something is not working
Issues related to the buildsystem, including CI
Small change most users won't notice
This issue or pull request already exists
New feature
Need some help
Quick or important fix that is merged directly into master, causing a new revision
#worksforme
More information is needed
This won't be fixed
No labels
feature
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
No Assignees
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: fsfw/fsfw#86
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
This is related to the following reply: Reply for wrong mode:
I will just copy the SHOULDDO text here:
It should be possible to store the return value in parameter 2.