Do build_conda_pkg from local recipe #2925
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2925 +/- ##
=====================================
Coverage 99.7% 99.7%
=====================================
Files 302 302
Lines 28412 28412
=====================================
Hits 28319 28319
Misses 93 93 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
core-requirements.txt
Outdated
| requirements-parser>=0.2.0 | ||
| shap>=0.36.0 | ||
| texttable>=1.6.2 | ||
| texttable==1.6.3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will delete prior to merge
| return name | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def test_texttable_version(): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will delete prior to merge. But the fact this passes means build_conda_pkg is building from the local recipe!
.github/meta.yaml
Outdated
| - psutil >=5.6.6 | ||
| - requirements-parser >=0.2.0 | ||
| - shap >=0.36.0 | ||
| - texttable ==1.6.3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will revert prior to merge
freddyaboulton
force-pushed
the
make-it-easier-to-fix-build-conda-pkg
branch
from
69bb221 to
2e7e95b
Compare
freddyaboulton
requested review from
ParthivNaresh,
angela97lin,
bchen1116,
christopherbunn,
chukarsten,
dsherry,
eccabay and
jeremyliweishih
and removed request for
bchen1116 and
dsherry
freddyaboulton
changed the title
chukarsten
left a comment
chukarsten
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Outstanding. This PR is great by itself, but also great in that it got me to reread the build_conda_pkg section again. Thank you for continually taking steps to streamline this!!
angela97lin
left a comment
angela97lin
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I love this, I think this will definitely make it much more obvious for devs :} Thanks, @freddyaboulton! 👏
freddyaboulton
force-pushed
the
make-it-easier-to-fix-build-conda-pkg
branch
from
2e7e95b to
4fe2569
Compare
Pull Request Description
Make it easier/less confusing to fix a failing
build_conda_pkgjob by letting users edit a local copy of the recipe instead.The idea is to hold the latest valid recipe in the EvalML repo as opposed to tracking that in
latest_release_changes. This lets devs make changes to the recipe in isolation to getbuild_conda_pkgto pass. I also figure it'll be more intuitive if all the files needed to make a PR green are located in the EvalML repo.We already have CI in place in the feedstock to check that the feedstock recipe matches the EvalML recipe so the two recipes should always be in synch.
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.