Remove duplicated instruction in manage-python.rst #11381
Merged
Conversation
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
The instruction conda create -n py39 python=3.9 anaconda was duplicated in the docs.
|
We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't have one on file for @simon9500. In order for us to review and merge your code, please e-sign the PDF at https://conda.io/en/latest/contributing.html#conda-contributor-license-agreement. We then need to manually verify your signature. We will ping the bot to refresh the PR status when we have confirmed your signature. |
|
@anaconda-issue-bot check |
travishathaway
pushed a commit
to travishathaway/conda
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 5, 2022
The instruction conda create -n py39 python=3.9 anaconda was duplicated in the docs.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
While reading the conda docs I noticed one of the instructions was written twice. It looks like it wasn't intended so I thought it was a good idea to correct it. See attached image below: