-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Sylvia whittle/ 517 swiss army knife #540
Conversation
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #540 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 81.65% 82.14% +0.49%
==========================================
Files 19 20 +1
Lines 2824 2868 +44
==========================================
+ Hits 2306 2356 +50
+ Misses 518 512 -6
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've been giving this some thought in light of the increasing flexibility for processing being requested in terms or running or re-running individual stages and think that we should keep the existing entry point in place for now but develop this new method of interacting in parallel, then when we are happy everything is working and all modules are covered we can make the switch.
To this end changes to the bug_report.md
, docs/*.md
and notebooks/*.md
would need excluding. The original entry-points (run_topostats
and toposum
) would need reinstating.
What do you think to this way of proceeding with developing this modular processing approach @SylviaWhittle ?
Thanks @ns-rse! I like your plan. I have attempted to keep the old entry point and have reverted all the documentation. I have also added tests for both the old and new entry points I have probably overlooked something that needs testing though. |
@@ -24,44 +23,6 @@ | |||
# pylint: disable=too-many-locals | |||
|
|||
|
|||
def create_parser() -> arg.ArgumentParser: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would need this reinstating too for toposum
entry point to work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ignore me, I've no looked at entry_point.py
and see you've moved all of these there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry for not looking closer when I started commenting, I see now that you've moved all the args for the existing entry points into entry_point
.
Neat tests for the various entry_point
too. 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is ready to merge and worth getting into main
so that we can start extending and modularising the workflow.
Closes #517
This PR changes the entry points for TopoStats. The new way of invoking the processing and summary functions of TopoStats is as such:
All previous arguments for
run_topostats
andtoposum
should still function, but as arguments for their respective sub-commands outlined above.