Skip to content

Conversation

@janvanrijn
Copy link
Member

Reference Issue

What does this PR implement/fix? Explain your changes.

How should this PR be tested?

Any other comments?

@mfeurer mfeurer mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2019
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Feb 20, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #620 into develop will increase coverage by 0.29%.
The diff coverage is 96.99%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #620      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    89.59%   89.88%   +0.29%     
===========================================
  Files           32       32              
  Lines         3123     3193      +70     
===========================================
+ Hits          2798     2870      +72     
+ Misses         325      323       -2
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
openml/tasks/task.py 95.87% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
openml/study/study.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
openml/runs/functions.py 87.06% <100%> (+0.65%) ⬆️
openml/tasks/functions.py 88.38% <100%> (+0.07%) ⬆️
openml/flows/functions.py 93.25% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
openml/flows/flow.py 93.82% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
openml/datasets/dataset.py 77.53% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
openml/runs/run.py 89.01% <100%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
openml/evaluations/functions.py 95.55% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
openml/study/__init__.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
... and 6 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 96db525...bb0161a. Read the comment docs.

@mfeurer
Copy link
Collaborator

mfeurer commented Feb 20, 2019

Looks good to me. Except that one line which basically says to not merge this PR.

@mfeurer
Copy link
Collaborator

mfeurer commented Feb 20, 2019

And it seems there are some minor flake8 errors in the push test. I really don't know what to do with the flake8 errors in the PR test as they are so many and would only happen after the merge.

@janvanrijn
Copy link
Member Author

Looks good to me. Except that one line which basically says to not merge this PR.

we need to wait for the PHP PR to be merged.

And it seems there are some minor flake8 errors in the push test. I really don't know what to do with the flake8 errors in the PR test as they are so many and would only happen after the merge.

Bigger issue: some lines are OK, other still contain mistakes (legacy mistakes, and we don't really want to solve them all at once)

Clearly it would be beneficial to have the whole project flake compatible. We can maybe ask the programmer to do so on one of the first days? (Once all big PR's are merged) From there on flake can run on all lines, not just the diff, and we don't have these problems anymore.

The problems introduced in this PR will be fixed by me.

@janvanrijn
Copy link
Member Author

openml/study/__init__.py:2:1: F401 '.functions.get_study' imported but unused
from .functions import get_study, create_study, create_benchmark_suite, \
^
openml/study/__init__.py:2:1: F401 '.functions.create_study' imported but unused
from .functions import get_study, create_study, create_benchmark_suite, \
^
openml/study/__init__.py:2:1: F401 '.functions.create_benchmark_suite' imported but unused
from .functions import get_study, create_study, create_benchmark_suite, \
^
openml/study/__init__.py:2:1: F401 '.functions.delete_study' imported but unused
from .functions import get_study, create_study, create_benchmark_suite, \
^
openml/study/__init__.py:2:1: F401 '.functions.attach_to_study' imported but unused
from .functions import get_study, create_study, create_benchmark_suite, \
^
openml/study/__init__.py:2:1: F401 '.functions.detach_from_study' imported but unused
from .functions import get_study, create_study, create_benchmark_suite, \

flake8 residuals. this is fine right? Can we inform it that this warning in __init__ files is OK?

@janvanrijn janvanrijn changed the title Add support for Studies [WIP] Add support for Studies Feb 22, 2019
# engine is behind.
# TODO: mock this? We have the arff already on the server
self._wait_for_processed_run(run.run_id, 200)
print(run.run_id)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you please remove this call to the print function?

@mfeurer
Copy link
Collaborator

mfeurer commented Feb 22, 2019

Looks good to me except for the failing unit tests.

@mfeurer mfeurer merged commit a2a4ade into develop Feb 22, 2019
@mfeurer mfeurer deleted the studies branch February 22, 2019 19:33
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.

4 participants