Skip to content

Conversation

@shsms
Copy link
Contributor

@shsms shsms commented Feb 9, 2026

The generation and evaluation of the formulas are now implemented and tested separately. So here we only need to test we are calling the correct formulas.

shsms added 5 commits February 9, 2026 10:06
Formula generation and evaluation are implemented separately and
tested elsewhere.

So here we only need to test that the formulas apply the correct
formula.

Signed-off-by: Sahas Subramanian <[email protected]>
Formula generation and evaluation are implemented separately and
tested elsewhere.

So here we only need to test that the formulas apply the correct
formula.

Signed-off-by: Sahas Subramanian <[email protected]>
Formula generation and evaluation are implemented separately and
tested elsewhere.

So here we only need to test that the formulas apply the correct
formula.

Signed-off-by: Sahas Subramanian <[email protected]>
These tests should ideally use custom formulas and not depend on the
formula generator, but that's a bigger change because that would
affect most of the tests in this repo.

Signed-off-by: Sahas Subramanian <[email protected]>
@shsms shsms requested a review from a team as a code owner February 9, 2026 09:32
@shsms shsms requested review from ela-kotulska-frequenz and removed request for a team February 9, 2026 09:32
@github-actions github-actions bot added part:tests Affects the unit, integration and performance (benchmarks) tests part:tooling Affects the development tooling (CI, deployment, dependency management, etc.) part:docs Affects the documentation labels Feb 9, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

@llucax llucax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, but I think we probably make more noise about the version bump.

RELEASE_NOTES.md Outdated
## Upgrading

<!-- Here goes notes on how to upgrade from previous versions, including deprecations and what they should be replaced with -->
- The minimum required version of `frequenz-microgrid-component-graph` is now `0.3.4`.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe copy the release notes of 0.3.4 or at least give a link to them and make it more prominent that there were some behavioral changes in that release?

Signed-off-by: Sahas Subramanian <[email protected]>
@shsms
Copy link
Contributor Author

shsms commented Feb 12, 2026

make it more prominent that there were some behavioral changes in that release

It's not such a big deal because this has been the only behaviour that's ever been in production. The early versions of the rust component graph made two changes - one turned out to be a perf issue, the other one wasn't usable until operation modes are available, so they are both back to old SDK behaviour.

But I've updated the release notes anyway.

@shsms shsms enabled auto-merge February 12, 2026 09:50
@shsms shsms added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 12, 2026
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from To do to Review approved in Python SDK Roadmap Feb 12, 2026
Merged via the queue into frequenz-floss:v1.x.x with commit 0390bf3 Feb 12, 2026
6 checks passed
@shsms shsms deleted the test-cleanup branch February 12, 2026 10:34
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Review approved to Done in Python SDK Roadmap Feb 12, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

part:docs Affects the documentation part:tests Affects the unit, integration and performance (benchmarks) tests part:tooling Affects the development tooling (CI, deployment, dependency management, etc.)

Projects

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Fix test broken by the update to frequenz-microgrid-component-graph 0.3.4

2 participants