add optional alt-property to LatLngLiteral and LatLngTuple - #66803

@henrythasler Thank you for submitting this PR!

This is a live comment which I will keep updated.

1 package in this PR

• leaflet — on npm, on unpkg (author is owner)
  • owner-approval: @someonewithpc

Code Reviews

Because you edited one package and updated the tests (👏), I can help you merge this PR once someone else signs off on it.

You can test the changes of this PR in the Playground.

Status

• ✅ No merge conflicts
• ✅ Continuous integration tests have passed
• ✅ Most recent commit is approved by type definition owners or DT maintainers

All of the items on the list are green. To merge, you need to post a comment including the string "Ready to merge" to bring in your changes.

{
  "type": "info",
  "now": "-",
  "pr_number": 66803,
  "author": "henrythasler",
  "headCommitOid": "4132e3bf41e654bf5e2442da501eba7358a9b21b",
  "mergeBaseOid": "4f8cfc8c3bd1d6d304424760ad2934fe1b3da190",
  "lastPushDate": "2023-09-23T09:51:48.000Z",
  "lastActivityDate": "2023-09-24T11:17:24.000Z",
  "mergeOfferDate": "2023-09-24T10:31:07.000Z",
  "mergeRequestDate": "2023-09-24T11:17:24.000Z",
  "mergeRequestUser": "henrythasler",
  "hasMergeConflict": false,
  "isFirstContribution": false,
  "tooManyFiles": false,
  "hugeChange": false,
  "popularityLevel": "Popular",
  "pkgInfo": [
    {
      "name": "leaflet",
      "kind": "edit",
      "files": [
        {
          "path": "types/leaflet/index.d.ts",
          "kind": "definition"
        },
        {
          "path": "types/leaflet/leaflet-tests.ts",
          "kind": "test"
        }
      ],
      "owners": [
        "alejo90",
        "atd-schubert",
        "mcauer",
        "ronikar",
        "life777",
        "henrythasler",
        "captain-igloo",
        "someonewithpc"
      ],
      "addedOwners": [],
      "deletedOwners": [],
      "popularityLevel": "Popular"
    }
  ],
  "reviews": [
    {
      "type": "approved",
      "reviewer": "someonewithpc",
      "date": "2023-09-24T10:30:23.000Z",
      "isMaintainer": false
    }
  ],
  "mainBotCommentID": 1732270302,
  "ciResult": "pass"
}

🔔 @alejo90 @atd-schubert @mcauer @ronikar @life777 @captain-igloo @someonewithpc — please review this PR in the next few days. Be sure to explicitly select Approve or Request Changes in the GitHub UI so I know what's going on.

@henrythasler Unfortunately, this pull request currently has a merge conflict 😥. Please update your PR branch to be up-to-date with respect to master. Have a nice day!

@henrythasler Unfortunately, this pull request currently has a merge conflict 😥. Please update your PR branch to be up-to-date with respect to master. Have a nice day!

@henrythasler One or more reviewers has requested changes. Please address their comments. I'll be back once they sign off or you've pushed new commits. Thank you!

The only difference I see is with type LatLngTuple where I prefer my Tuple [number, number, number?] with an optional property over your Union [number, number] | [number, number, number]. What do you think?

The only difference I see is with type LatLngTuple where I prefer my Tuple [number, number, number?] with an optional property over your Union [number, number] | [number, number, number]. What do you think?

Either is fine, but I think the union is less surprising. But the other differences were with the warnings, I think something may have gone wrong when you tried to solve merge conflicts

If you mean the specific linter-rules, they were introduced by PR66798. I don't want to revert that change. It seems the diff shown here did not pick this up correctly.

@henrythasler: Everything looks good here. I am ready to merge this PR (at 4132e3b) on your behalf whenever you think it's ready.

If you'd like that to happen, please post a comment saying:

Ready to merge

and I'll merge this PR almost instantly. Thanks for helping out! ❤️

(@alejo90, @atd-schubert, @mcauer, @ronikar, @life777, @captain-igloo, @someonewithpc: you can do this too.)

Ready to merge