Do build_conda_pkg from local recipe #2925
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
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.
|
freddyaboulton
commented
Oct 14, 2021
core-requirements.txt
Outdated
| @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ click>=7.1.2 | |||
| psutil>=5.6.6 | |||
| 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
freddyaboulton
commented
Oct 14, 2021
| @@ -13,6 +13,12 @@ def _get_req_name(name): | |||
| 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!
freddyaboulton
commented
Oct 14, 2021
.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Outdated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
bchen1116,
dsherry,
angela97lin,
christopherbunn,
chukarsten,
eccabay,
jeremyliweishih and
ParthivNaresh
and removed request for
bchen1116 and
dsherry
freddyaboulton
changed the title
chukarsten
approved these changes
Oct 18, 2021
angela97lin
approved these changes
Oct 18, 2021
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
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.