Enhance node name extraction logic to accurately classify file format…

[jokob-sk]

…s for PUSH and PULL modes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Enhanced sync protocol test suite with improved validation of filename format detection to distinguish between PUSH and PULL operations.
  • Added regression test to ensure node names containing specific encoded markers are correctly processed in PULL mode.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 87f0f272-eca1-42d9-8789-a9525b552acc

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between bfe5bc0 and c829c4c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• test/plugins/test_sync_protocol.py

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The test suite's node name extraction utility was refined to more strictly distinguish PUSH vs PULL filename patterns by requiring both a .decoded./.encoded. marker and a numeric counter segment for PUSH classification. A regression test was added to ensure PULL filenames with .encoded. in the node name are not misclassified.

Changes

Filename Detection Logic Refinement

Layer / File(s)	Summary
PUSH/PULL detection logic update test/plugins/test_sync_protocol.py	_node_name_from_filename now requires both a .decoded./.encoded. marker and a numeric counter segment to classify a filename as PUSH; otherwise it falls back to PULL extraction. Docstring expanded to document both supported filename shapes.
Regression test for encoded node names in PULL mode test/plugins/test_sync_protocol.py	Added test_pull_with_encoded_in_node_name to verify that PULL filenames containing .encoded. in the node name extract correctly as PULL node names without PUSH misclassification.

Possibly related PRs

• netalertx/NetAlertX#1653: Both PRs adjust SYNC filename/node-name extraction logic for decoded/encoded artifacts in the sync protocol implementation and tests.

Poem

A rabbit refines the path with care,
Distinguishing PUSH from PULL with flair,
Numeric counts now validate true,
Edge cases tested, old bugs subdued! 🐰✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 33.33% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and specifically summarizes the main change: enhancing node name extraction logic to accurately classify file formats for PUSH and PULL modes, which aligns with the changeset updates to the _node_name_from_filename function.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate docstrings

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch next_release

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}