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

Fix level 2 child node address handling #49

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

Hypecta
Copy link

@Hypecta Hypecta commented Sep 5, 2023

Referencing the issue I made in #48 , this should fix the level 2 child node address handling when getting a mesh address response from the master or parent node.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 5, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #49 (19e9fc9) into master (3d3bc01) will not change coverage.
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

❗ Current head 19e9fc9 differs from pull request most recent head bafbc17. Consider uploading reports for the commit bafbc17 to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master      #49   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   86.89%   86.89%           
=======================================
  Files          16       16           
  Lines        2465     2465           
=======================================
  Hits         2142     2142           
  Misses        323      323           
Files Changed Coverage Δ
circuitpython_nrf24l01/rf24_mesh.py 37.91% <0.00%> (ø)

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@2bndy5
Copy link
Member

2bndy5 commented Sep 5, 2023

CI has failed the linter checks. This is because you left long lines of commented out debug statements. I merged the docs build fix to master, so that CI job should pass when you rebase your branch.

Please remove those debugging lines and rebase your branch on this repo's on master branch.

@2bndy5
Copy link
Member

2bndy5 commented Sep 5, 2023

#48 was resolved by #50 for better execution efficiency.

@2bndy5 2bndy5 closed this Sep 5, 2023
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