Navigation Menu

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

minor tweaks w.r.t. easyconfig format 2.0 support #750

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Nov 8, 2013

Conversation

boegel
Copy link
Member

@boegel boegel commented Nov 7, 2013

No description provided.

@JensTimmerman
Copy link
Contributor

ok

@JensTimmerman
Copy link
Contributor

ok

@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Nov 7, 2013

@stdweird: Please review. Any suggestions w.r.t. the deprecation of blocks in easyconfigs (we discussed this, but I forget the details)? Because now using any easyconfig file in the (draft) format 2.0 will also run into this deprecation...

@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Nov 8, 2013

@stdweird: I've cleaned up the deprecation, now it's effectively only deprecated for format 1.0, it will drop down to the NotImplementedError for any easyconfig file in (draft) format 2.0

@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Nov 8, 2013

@stdweird: moved retrieve_blocks_in_spec to one.py, OK now?

@stdweird
Copy link
Contributor

stdweird commented Nov 8, 2013

@boegel can we have a unittest for such a block easyconfig. otherwise i looks good

@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Nov 8, 2013

@stdweird: Test case added, and it was needed, two imports were missing, so it was broken by moving it... :-/

boegel added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 8, 2013
minor tweaks w.r.t. easyconfig format 2.0 support
@boegel boegel merged commit c455973 into easybuilders:develop Nov 8, 2013
@boegel boegel deleted the ec_format_v2.0 branch November 8, 2013 17:57
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

3 participants