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

avoid doctest failing when missing bcolz or pytables (hard setup) #493

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 25, 2020

Conversation

juarezr
Copy link
Member

@juarezr juarezr commented Jun 24, 2020

Changes

This is just a quality of life improvement.
Changed docstring for skipping doctests for bcolz and pytables.
It's hard to setup bcolz and pytables because they need local packages installed.
Every time that included code in docstrings they failed leading and one need to erase the docstring for getting the test to pass.

Checklist

As there is no new features some items don't apply bellow.

  • Includes unit tests
  • New functions have docstrings with examples that can be run with doctest
  • New functions are included in API docs
  • Docstrings include notes for any changes to API or behaviour
  • Travis CI passes (unit tests run under Linux)
  • AppVeyor CI passes (unit tests run under Windows)
  • Unit test coverage has not decreased (see Coveralls)
  • All changes documented in docs/changes.rst
  • Ready to review and merge

This is just a quality of life improvement.
Changed docstring for skipping doctests for bcolz and pytables.
It's hard to setup bcolz and pytables because they need local packages installed.
Every time that included code in docstrings they failed leading and one need to erase the docstring for getting the test to pass.
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 24, 2020

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-1.2%) to 90.443% when pulling e5bf683 on juarezr:petl_further into ee769a7 on petl-developers:master.

Copy link
Collaborator

@alimanfoo alimanfoo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @juarezr, a couple of small suggestions just to avoid confusion between hdf5 and hdfs, otherwise LGTM.

petl/io/pytables.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
petl/io/pytables.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
petl/io/pytables.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
petl/io/pytables.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
…opers#493


Good catch!

Co-authored-by: Alistair Miles <alimanfoo@googlemail.com>
Copy link
Collaborator

@alimanfoo alimanfoo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks, LGTM, good to merge?

@juarezr
Copy link
Member Author

juarezr commented Jun 25, 2020

Merge, please.

@alimanfoo alimanfoo merged commit 65139a5 into petl-developers:master Jun 25, 2020
@juarezr juarezr deleted the petl_further branch September 17, 2020 15:01
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