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

Ball_node_fastener #325

Open
wants to merge 93 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Ball_node_fastener #325

wants to merge 93 commits into from

Conversation

obucklin
Copy link
Contributor

@obucklin obucklin commented Nov 12, 2024

What type of change is this?

  • Bug fix in a backwards-compatible manner.
  • New feature in a backwards-compatible manner.
  • Breaking change: bug fix or new feature that involve incompatible API changes.
  • Other (e.g. doc update, configuration, etc)

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your code.

  • I added a line to the CHANGELOG.md file in the Unreleased section under the most fitting heading (e.g. Added, Changed, Removed).
  • I ran all tests on my computer and it's all green (i.e. invoke test).
  • I ran lint on my computer and there are no errors (i.e. invoke lint).
  • I added new functions/classes and made them available on a second-level import, e.g. compas_timber.datastructures.Beam.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
  • I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate)

@obucklin obucklin marked this pull request as ready for review November 21, 2024 09:59
@obucklin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@chenkasirer @papachap Ready for review



class BallNodeJoint(Joint):
"""Represents a ball node type joint which joins the ends of multiple beams,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

where does this sit in the whole discussion of "fastener is a result of the design" vs. "design must comply with pre-defined fastener"?

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