-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.4k
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
[RLlib] Remove utilities/tests/classes not needed anymore. #40939
[RLlib] Remove utilities/tests/classes not needed anymore. #40939
Conversation
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ot_needed_anymore' into remove_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
NOTE: premerge tests are failing. |
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.
It's just not clear to me what the decision process behind removals are. I have asked why on some of those that I would probably not have deleted. Some explanation on the process is missing on the PR details.
rllib/examples/custom_keras_model.py
Outdated
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.
why this one?
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.
Undone.
rllib/examples/custom_rnn_model.py
Outdated
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.
should we have an equivalent RLModule example for this?
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.
Yes :) Undone
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.
We should have a customer EnvRunner equivalent for this?
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.
More like a custom Learner? The "custom" bit here is the loss function. Undone.
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.
Has this been moved to the contrib folder?
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.
Good catch. This is actually a "tuned_example". Created it in rllib_contrib
. It wasn't run as a test in the old CI, but I activated it now. Let's see whether it learns a little bit (0.6 win rate vs random should be doable :) ).
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.
why?
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.
This is still an experimental API that we should no longer pursue. It's off by default and will be fully replaced by the new connectors.
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.
why?
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.
SlateQ is now in rllib_contrib.
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.
why?
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.
undone
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.
why?
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.
undone
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.
why?
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.
undone
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
Thanks for your review @kouroshHakha ! And yes, we will replace most of our examples with new stack equivalents, but also clean up this folder well (it's become pretty messy over time :( ). |
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ot_needed_anymore' into remove_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
…ve_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
Remove utilities/tests/classes not needed anymore.
Why are these changes needed?
Related issue number
Checks
git commit -s
) in this PR.scripts/format.sh
to lint the changes in this PR.method in Tune, I've added it in
doc/source/tune/api/
under thecorresponding
.rst
file.