Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Return rule-id's in execute response #561

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Apr 3, 2024
Merged

Return rule-id's in execute response #561

merged 10 commits into from
Apr 3, 2024

Conversation

goodlyrottenapple
Copy link
Contributor

@goodlyrottenapple goodlyrottenapple commented Mar 26, 2024 •
edited
Loading

fixes #536 by returning the app;lied rule id and rule-substitution/predicate for branching responses

@goodlyrottenapple goodlyrottenapple marked this pull request as ready for review March 27, 2024 15:30
jberthold
jberthold reviewed Mar 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jberthold jberthold left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not optimal that the a-to-f tests got more complicated.
I wonder if a new test directory would have been better.

test/rpc-integration/test-a-to-f/response-branching.booster-dev Show resolved Hide resolved
@goodlyrottenapple goodlyrottenapple merged commit bafee82 into main Apr 3, 2024
5 checks passed
@goodlyrottenapple goodlyrottenapple deleted the sam/return-rule-id branch April 3, 2024 11:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jberthold jberthold jberthold approved these changes

@geo2a geo2a geo2a approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Branch rule-id and condition are missing from response
3 participants
@goodlyrottenapple @jberthold @geo2a