Removing core-requirements from installed package - #1429
Conversation
9785ab3 to
276d008
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1429 +/- ##
=========================================
- Coverage 100.0% 100.0% -0.0%
=========================================
Files 218 218
Lines 14438 14433 -5
=========================================
- Hits 14431 14426 -5
Misses 7 7
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good! Makes me wonder how useful this will be, now that we're basically printing out pip freeze and showing a lot of packages that users may have installed that aren't relevant to evalml (I think featuretools used this to help debug any sort of user-filed issues), but am a fan of removing core-requirements 👍
dsherry
left a comment
dsherry
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM! Its funny that the output sorts in reverse alphabetical order haha
I left one comment about test pathing but that's all I got
@angela97lin yep I hear you. I think its good to have more rather than less! We can always filter it down to the deps evalml relies on.
| if x in installed_packages: | ||
| packages_to_log.append((x, installed_packages[x])) | ||
| for package, version in packages_to_log: | ||
| for package, version in installed_packages.items(): |
| def test_get_core_requirements(): | ||
| assert len(get_core_requirements()) == 15 | ||
| def get_core_requirements(current_dir): | ||
| reqs_path = os.path.join(current_dir, '../../../core-requirements.txt') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two notes:
- This path won't work on windows, right? Interesting that the windows test still passed... Either way, safest to use
pathlib:pathlib.Path('..', '..', '..', 'core-requirements.txt') - I thought there was a way to have pytest automagically handle this for you somehow? Although I just spent 2min googling and couldn't find it 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@dsherry I spent some time looking at this on the circle-ci windows vm and I don't have a satisfying explanation as to why this works...but it does lol.
Running os.path.join with these inputs returns a string with mixed windows and unix separators - so it should cause a problem:
But then open just handles it like a champ - no idea how it works. It must be doing something to resolve the separators under the hood.
Needless to say, I'll just change this to pathlib lol.
1f3f623 to
92ac1f4
Compare
* Refactoring cli to print all dependencies. * Adding PR 1429 to release notes. * Fixing typo in PR 1429 that was causing the release_notes_updated check to fail. * Fixing import order in test_cli_utils.py * Using pathlib for get_core_requirements in test_cli_utils.py
3 participants
Pull Request Description
Fixes #1328
Based on the discussion on #1293, I am printing out all of the installed packages instead of just the core requirements.
This is what the cli output looks like now:
After creating the pull request: in order to pass the release_notes_updated check you will need to update the "Future Release" section of
docs/source/release_notes.rstto include this pull request by adding :pr:123.