AddControlActionObject instead of MergePropertyValueSpecificationPote…

[aggelosgkiokas]

AddControlActionObject instead of MergePropertyValue....

[pep8speaks]

Hello @aggelosgkiokas! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for PEP 8 issues, and found:

• In the file trompace/__init__.py:

Line 69:13: E265 block comment should start with '# '

• In the file trompace/mutations/controlaction.py:

Line 104:5: E265 block comment should start with '# ' Line 106:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1 Line 117:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1 Line 127:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1 Line 127:72: E231 missing whitespace after ':' Line 131:24: E231 missing whitespace after ':' Line 139:57: W292 no newline at end of file

Comment last updated at 2020-11-23 15:14:18 UTC

[alastair]

There are two types of mutations for linking two items together. One is Add.... and the other is Merge...., merge will only add once - if it already exists and you add it again, it won't add it a second time. Add will add a relationship multiple times. For that reason we've been using the Merge mutation instead.

In this specific case, can you explain why you changed the name of the mutation, but kept the function name, documentation, and parameters? If you need the ability to make a AddControlActionObject mutation, then we should make a new function for it rather than reusing an existing method. Is MergePropertyValueSpecificationPotentialAction no longer needed? If so, we can delete it

[aggelosgkiokas]

There are two types of mutations for linking two items together. One is Add.... and the other is Merge...., merge will only add once - if it already exists and you add it again, it won't add it a second time. Add will add a relationship multiple times. For that reason we've been using the Merge mutation instead.

In this specific case, can you explain why you changed the name of the mutation, but kept the function name, documentation, and parameters? If you need the ability to make a AddControlActionObject mutation, then we should make a new function for it rather than reusing an existing method. Is MergePropertyValueSpecificationPotentialAction no longer needed? If so, we can delete it

The Merge() mutation seemed not not work. I used the AddControlActionObject from the example in the ce-poc-algorithm repository, where the AddControlActionObject is used. But you are right. In any case I'll create an additional function in the ce-client, and at the end, if the Merge(..) is not needed we can remove it. I'll update the branch and will make a new pull request