-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
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
[WIP] General refreshing of package #17
Conversation
randyzwitch
commented
Dec 12, 2017
- Switch HTTP.jl for requests
- Add Travis testing
- Work with DataFrames 0.11
- Switch API to splat arguments, rather than required
- Remove function stubs that aren’t going to be implemented any time soon
Update calls from Requests to HTTP, for better long-term support
Use metaprogramming to generate GET endpoints having no required arguments
This is covered by OAuth.jl
String interpolation within macro needs some sort of escaping, figure out later
Remove methods that aren’t implemented, better typing, more Julian interface
Collapse files, delete excess labelling
Get testing framework back to working
So embarrassing
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ | |||
julia 0.6 | |||
DataFrames | |||
DataFrames 0.11 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If the package actually worked with 0.11 without any changes, and that it works with 0.10 too, better not add this requirement. We could also remove the incorrect upper bounds from METADATA.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, I'm thinking of still doing some changes that might eventually require 0.11. The DataFrame
methods currently didn't use anything special around nullable
/nothing/missing, but I'm thinking of improving the DataFrame representation if I'm already going to be releasing a new version
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fine, I just wanted to note it. Though we'd better remove upper bounds from METADATA anyway, as it's more correct.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #17 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage ? 22.85%
=========================================
Files ? 5
Lines ? 35
Branches ? 0
=========================================
Hits ? 8
Misses ? 27
Partials ? 0
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|