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

Descriptive names for ci runs #3336

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 6, 2023

Conversation

arunppsg
Copy link
Contributor

@arunppsg arunppsg commented Apr 4, 2023

Description

Summary of changes:

  • Added descriptive names to jobs in CI. Earlier, when the CI checks after the run was complete, it will show test, test, ... because multiple jobs had same names. The change adds descriptive names, allowing to easily catch failed jobs.
  • Removed macOS installation and cache collection steps (mostly if conditions) since our CI does not run in macOS. Only the build CI runs in macOS and macOS installation is preserved there.
  • Minor improvement to pull request template.

Type of change

Please check the option that is related to your PR.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
    • In this case, we recommend to discuss your modification on GitHub issues before creating the PR
  • Documentations (modification for documents)

Checklist

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
    • Run yapf -i <modified file> and check no errors (yapf version must be 0.32.0)
    • Run mypy -p deepchem and check no errors
    • Run flake8 <modified file> --count and check no errors
    • Run python -m doctest <modified file> and check no errors
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • I have checked my code and corrected any misspellings

Copy link
Member

@rbharath rbharath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There are multiple unrelated changes in this PR. I'd suggest splitting up into a few smaller PRs (pull request template simplification, descriptive names, cache changes). I'm not sure about the cache change in particular, so let's discuss that offline

uses: actions/cache@v3
with:
path: ~/.cache/pip
key: ${{ runner.os }}-pip-${{ hashFiles('requirements/jax/**') }}
restore-keys: |
${{ runner.os }}-pip-
- name: Cache pip packages for MacOS
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pytest runs on mac right? Let's chat offline

@arunppsg
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunppsg commented Apr 5, 2023

There are multiple unrelated changes in this PR. I'd suggest splitting up into a few smaller PRs (pull request template simplification, descriptive names, cache changes). I'm not sure about the cache change in particular, so let's discuss that offline

I have made cache changes into a separate pull request (#3342 )

Copy link
Member

@rbharath rbharath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Unrelated to this PR, it looks like there is a Grover failure:

_________________________ testGroverBondVocabPredictor _________________________

    @pytest.mark.torch
    def testGroverBondVocabPredictor():
        from deepchem.models.torch_models.grover_layers import GroverBondVocabPredictor
        num_bonds = 20
        in_features, vocab_size = 16, 10
        layer = GroverBondVocabPredictor(vocab_size, in_features)
        embedding = torch.randn(num_bonds * 2, in_features)
>       result = layer(embedding)

deepchem/models/torch_models/tests/test_grover_layers.py:49: 

Can you take a look and address in a follow up PR @gusty1g ?

@arunppsg
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunppsg commented Apr 6, 2023

The failure in grover was addressed in #3335. Since this branch is not updated with master branch, it is popping up here.

@arunppsg arunppsg merged commit 20a13a7 into deepchem:master Apr 6, 2023
@arunppsg arunppsg deleted the ci-descriptive-names branch April 6, 2023 08:54
@arunppsg arunppsg restored the ci-descriptive-names branch April 6, 2023 08:54
arunppsg pushed a commit to arunppsg/deepchem that referenced this pull request Apr 7, 2023
a missed update to ci name
arunppsg pushed a commit to arunppsg/deepchem that referenced this pull request Apr 7, 2023
@arunppsg arunppsg mentioned this pull request Apr 7, 2023
15 tasks
rbharath added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 10, 2023
@arunppsg arunppsg deleted the ci-descriptive-names branch June 30, 2023 03:15
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

2 participants