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

Update docs #222

Merged
merged 48 commits into from Dec 10, 2019
Merged

Update docs #222

merged 48 commits into from Dec 10, 2019

Conversation

jeremyliweishih
Copy link
Contributor

@jeremyliweishih jeremyliweishih commented Nov 18, 2019

Working on docs with notes here.
https://evalml.featurelabs.com/en/update-docs/

  • Add flavor to index
  • Add skeleton for new content
  • New content
    • Optimization
    • Pipelines and Components
    • Guardrails
    • Lead Scoring
  • Missing API
    • Components
  • Add FAQ

  • Revise new content
  • Revise old content
    • Edit old tutorials and maybe remove some
    • Show inherited methods
    • Decide what needs to be hidden
    • Check docstrings
    • Clean and standardize docstrings
  • Remove output from cells when done

Further work (further issues):

  • Document objective and standard metrics with what they actually entail
  • Add more docstring for component and pipeline __init__ (or any other __init__ for that matter)
  • doc tests on all relevant methods
  • explain Bayesian optimization and other tuners
  • API for custom tuners?

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 18, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #222 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #222   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.08%   97.08%           
=======================================
  Files          95       95           
  Lines        2742     2742           
=======================================
  Hits         2662     2662           
  Misses         80       80
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
evalml/demos/fraud.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/objectives/fraud_cost.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/pipelines/utils.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/tuners/skopt_tuner.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/pipelines/pipeline_plots.py 91.66% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
...l/pipelines/components/transformers/transformer.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/demos/diabetes.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/pipelines/pipeline_base.py 97.33% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/guardrails/utils.py 96% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
evalml/preprocessing/utils.py 83.72% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
... and 10 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 5cd6df8...3640a8d. Read the comment docs.

@jeremyliweishih jeremyliweishih requested a review from dsherry Dec 6, 2019
@jeremyliweishih jeremyliweishih requested a review from kmax12 Dec 9, 2019
@kmax12
Copy link
Contributor

kmax12 commented Dec 9, 2019

i think we should remove the optimization section for now. at least until we have more content for it. no need to let that block is merging this in.

Copy link
Contributor

@angela97lin angela97lin left a comment

Yay, lots of good content here! Mostly just added comments regarding grammar + small inconsistencies.

docs/source/faq.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/source/faq.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/source/faq.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/source/faq.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/source/faq.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/source/pipelines/overview.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/source/pipelines/overview.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
evalml/demos/wine.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
evalml/pipelines/components/component_base.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
evalml/pipelines/components/component_base.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jeremyliweishih jeremyliweishih requested review from dsherry and kmax12 and removed request for dsherry and kmax12 Dec 10, 2019
kmax12
kmax12 approved these changes Dec 10, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@kmax12 kmax12 left a comment

LGTM. is the plan to create new issues for the few things uncheck and mentioned in the issues description?

@jeremyliweishih
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeremyliweishih commented Dec 10, 2019

@kmax12 yep! Everything under further issues.

@jeremyliweishih jeremyliweishih changed the title WIP: Update docs Update docs Dec 10, 2019
@jeremyliweishih jeremyliweishih merged commit 4f24a55 into master Dec 10, 2019
@dsherry dsherry deleted the update-docs branch May 26, 2020
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

4 participants