Merged
Conversation
This was referenced Aug 21, 2025
Contributor
sisyphusSmiling
left a comment
sisyphusSmiling
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For these connectors, the min & max available are equal. Made suggestions to reflect that. I think the current implementation is correct from the perspective that the underlying token sources have those the max funds available, but if consumers are only concerned with the Source connectors, then the returned values exceed the maximum available.
Co-authored-by: Giovanni Sanchez <108043524+sisyphusSmiling@users.noreply.github.com>
Merged
sisyphusSmiling
approved these changes
Sep 5, 2025
sisyphusSmiling
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 5, 2025
This reverts commit 9daf5f0.
nialexsan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 6, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
alternative approach to #25