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

Pinned WW top at 0.4.2 and bottom at 0.4.1 #2460

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jun 30, 2021
Merged

Pinned WW top at 0.4.2 and bottom at 0.4.1 #2460

merged 3 commits into from Jun 30, 2021

Conversation

chukarsten
Copy link
Contributor

@chukarsten chukarsten commented Jun 29, 2021

In preparation for woodwork 0.5.0 release and evaluate the new type in #2459 .

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 29, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #2460 (a4271bd) into main (3d9163d) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main   #2460   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   99.7%   99.7%           
=====================================
  Files        283     283           
  Lines      25500   25500           
=====================================
  Hits       25400   25400           
  Misses       100     100           

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 3d9163d...a4271bd. Read the comment docs.

@chukarsten chukarsten marked this pull request as ready for review June 30, 2021 00:31
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ psutil>=5.6.6
requirements-parser>=0.2.0
shap>=0.36.0
texttable>=1.6.2
woodwork>=0.4.1
woodwork>=0.4.1,<=0.4.2
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we do woodwork>=0.4.1,<0.5.0? If they follow semantic versioning, 0.5.0 will be the next breaking change

@gsheni

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed, <0.5.0 is the right approach, and will avoid the upcoming breaking change.

Copy link
Contributor

@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@chukarsten Looks good to me once we set the upper version at < 5.0.0! Thank you!

Updated upper limit
@chukarsten chukarsten merged commit e15730f into main Jun 30, 2021
@dsherry dsherry mentioned this pull request Jul 2, 2021
@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton deleted the pin_ww_042 branch May 13, 2022 15:02
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