AppEngine support (and II)#356
Merged
Merged
Conversation
|
@zugaldia, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @cammace, @ghoshkaj and @ivovandongen to be potential reviewers. |
Member
Author
|
A sample |
cammace
approved these changes
Feb 23, 2017
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Turns out that the approach in #344 wouldn't work if both the client and the factory were set at the same time. This PR makes sure we only set one.
It also adds a number of no-args constructors to make Gson happy.