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.

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

Modify isRemedialActionAvailable to use a FlowResult #875

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 29, 2024

Conversation

phiedw
Copy link
Collaborator

@phiedw phiedw commented Jan 25, 2024

Modify isRemedialActionAvailable to use a FlowResult instead of a PerimeterResult to make it less restrictive

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

  • The commit message follows our guidelines

Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem?

No

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Feature

What is the current behavior?

The method needs a PerimeterResult

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
It now uses a FlowResult (less restrictive)

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

  • Yes
  • No

Other information:

Change following a problem encountered by gridcapa

…PerimeterResult to make it less restrictive

Signed-off-by: Philippe Edwards <philippe.edwards@rte-france.com>
@phiedw phiedw requested a review from pet-mit January 25, 2024 10:02
Signed-off-by: Philippe Edwards <philippe.edwards@rte-france.com>
@phiedw phiedw merged commit 8779169 into main Jan 29, 2024
6 checks passed
@pet-mit pet-mit deleted the remedial_action_available_flow branch February 28, 2024 15:29
MartinBelthle pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 28, 2024
* modified isRemedialActionAvailable to take a FlowResult instead of a PerimeterResult to make it less restrictive

---------

Signed-off-by: Philippe Edwards <philippe.edwards@rte-france.com>
Signed-off-by: belthlemar <martin.belthle@rte-france.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants