Skip to content

Conversation

@quinarygio
Copy link
Contributor

@quinarygio quinarygio commented Nov 28, 2025

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

  • The commit message follows our guidelines
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
  • A PR or issue has been opened in all impacted repositories (if any)

Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem?

#3631

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

What is the current behavior?

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?

Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API?

  • Yes
  • No

If yes, please check if the following requirements are fulfilled

  • The Breaking Change or Deprecated label has been added
  • The migration steps are described in the following section

What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR? (migration steps)

Other information:

zamarrenolm
zamarrenolm previously approved these changes Dec 1, 2025
.setNode(2)
.add();

// Create 3 switches
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
// Create 3 switches
// Create 2 switches

Comment on lines 20 to 24
* Test to verify consistency between getSwitches(), getSwitchStream(), and
* getSwitchCount() methods
* in node-breaker topology. These methods should all exclude
* InternalConnections and only return
* real voltage level switches.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* Test to verify consistency between getSwitches(), getSwitchStream(), and
* getSwitchCount() methods
* in node-breaker topology. These methods should all exclude
* InternalConnections and only return
* real voltage level switches.
* Test to verify consistency between getSwitches(), getSwitchStream(), and
* getSwitchCount() methods in node-breaker topology. These methods should all exclude
* InternalConnections and only return real voltage level switches.

Signed-off-by: Giovanni Ferrari <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@rolnico rolnico left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@zamarrenolm zamarrenolm self-requested a review December 11, 2025 09:35
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from TODO to Approved in Release 03/2026 Dec 31, 2025
@alicecaron alicecaron moved this from Approved to Waiting for review in Release 03/2026 Dec 31, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

Status: Waiting for review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Inconsistence in NodeBreaker topology between getting switches and switches count

5 participants