The following commit
has introduced a backward incompatible change (see for example RTK’s issues). Is this intentional? I have the feeling that defining a default template would have avoided this… but I’m guessing I’m missing something. Thanks in advance!
@matt.mccormick @grothausmann.roman
No, the backwards incompatible change was not intentional – thanks for the report @simon.rit.
Please review this patch, which adds a compatibility function: