Skip to content
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

getting a sense of the lib: enriching a bit geonames #253

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Jul 30, 2017
Merged

getting a sense of the lib: enriching a bit geonames #253

merged 6 commits into from Jul 30, 2017

Conversation

ebreton
Copy link
Collaborator

@ebreton ebreton commented Jul 29, 2017

  • added a test file for geonames
  • retrieved more attributes from results
  • added methods children and hierarchy
  • reviewed slightly doc

question : how should be handled multiple results (e.g. the ones from hierarchy) ?

@ebreton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ebreton commented Jul 29, 2017

I guess #59 gives an answer to my question... ?
If yes, we can discuss there ^^

@ebreton ebreton merged commit 6281796 into DenisCarriere:master Jul 30, 2017
@ebreton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ebreton commented Jul 30, 2017

Thanks for the invite !
Write accesses ok.

Are you confortable to work within an open pull request for new features ?

We could use feature_multi_result to discuss #59 for instance

@ebreton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ebreton commented Jul 30, 2017

I did not see before, but the build fails from master...
strange since it works from the PR...
Have you investigated already ?

@DenisCarriere
Copy link
Owner

It is strange that the master branch fails but the PR passes.

Would be better if the tests didn't have to make HTTP requests instead the tests should simply parse JSON responses.

@DenisCarriere
Copy link
Owner

@ebreton Let me know whenever you want me to push a new release on PyPi, just @ me with the release version.

@ebreton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ebreton commented Jul 31, 2017

would it be only for me, I would push every merge that is done on master. Ideally, with a successful build of course... but if you latest releases were made with the same states, I would go for keeping the releases ongoing.

How much automated is your release process to PyPi ?

With regards to the the http requests in tests, I agree with you, definitively. A quick look for mocking requests leads to : http://requests-mock.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html

I am going to give a try for this

@DenisCarriere
Copy link
Owner

👍 using mocking requests.

Just recently I've had to entirely redo PyPi process, I think it got simpler, but I'm 👍 doing an entire revamp to make it simpler. In the ideal world it would be nice to publish a new release directly from TravisCI (if the version changes).

I've been in the NPM ecosystem for a while and I find publishing Python modules to be quite a pain, however with the new PyPi it got a tad easier.

@ebreton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ebreton commented Aug 1, 2017

I'm 👍 doing an entire revamp to make it simpler.

cool. I am interested !
is it on github ?

@DenisCarriere
Copy link
Owner

DenisCarriere commented Aug 2, 2017

No I said "I'm good if we do an entire revamp" which is what you are currently doing 👍

@ebreton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ebreton commented Aug 2, 2017

aaah ok :)

sooo... how do you currently push to pypi ? Makefile ?

@DenisCarriere
Copy link
Owner

I have a Makefile, however PyPi changed and I don't know if the Makefile is correct anymore.

I only published once using the new PyPi, still new to it.

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.

None yet

2 participants