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

🚀 Add information to app summary output for what will be run on --commit (#27) #53

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 16, 2023

Conversation

Keimya
Copy link
Collaborator

@Keimya Keimya commented Jun 12, 2023

app.py
In the first invocation without running commit:

  • "RAN" is changed to "STAGED"
  • "SKIPPED" analyses are separated into SUCCEEDED, FAILED, also indicating if results are protected

In the second invocation upon --commit:

  • "RAN" is displayed as the sum of run analyses + unprotected succeeded analyses

scenarios run for protected and unprotected results, and when commit = True and commit = False

test_app.py

  • def test_commit_description added

  • def test_get_experiments_from_default_cli_options modified

  • 🐛   Bug fix

  • 🚀   New feature

  • 🔧   Code refactor

  • ⚠️   Breaking change that would cause existing functionality to change

  • 📘   I have updated the documentation accordingly

  • ✅   I have added tests to cover my changes

@Keimya Keimya requested a review from juanesarango June 12, 2023 21:46
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 12, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 96.00% and project coverage change: -0.01 ⚠️

Comparison is base (cef1f66) 95.24% compared to head (4b0ff05) 95.24%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #53      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.24%   95.24%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          19       19              
  Lines        2336     2357      +21     
==========================================
+ Hits         2225     2245      +20     
- Misses        111      112       +1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
isabl_cli/app.py 98.69% <96.00%> (-0.11%) ⬇️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

isabl_cli/app.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@juanesarango
Copy link
Contributor

juanesarango commented Jun 12, 2023

Thanks for the PR. It's getting a good shape.
Following @funnell's suggestions from #27 what if we do it like this:

(1) When analyses are protected:

  • First invocation without --commit:
STAGED 150 | SKIPPED 100 | INVALID 0

Add --commit to run 150 analyses:
  • Second invocation with --commit:
RAN 150 | SKIPPED 100 | INVALID 0

(2) When analyses are NOT protected:

  • First invocation without --commit:
STAGED 150 | SKIPPED 100 | INVALID 0

SKIPPED 100:
    97   SUCCEEDED (Unprotected)
    3     FAILED analyses will be skipped

Add --commit to run 247 analyses:
  • Second invocation with --commit:
RAN 247 | SKIPPED 3 | INVALID 0

This way in the default scenario where analyses are protected we don't need to detailed each one of the skipped ones saying (Protected).

What do you think? @funnell @Keimya

@Keimya
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Keimya commented Jun 13, 2023

unprotected results protected results

@Keimya
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Keimya commented Jun 13, 2023

updated output:
protected results
protected_results2

unprotected results
unprotected_results2

@funnell
Copy link
Collaborator

funnell commented Jun 13, 2023

I think I still prefer the message saying something like this for unprotected:

Add --commit to run 247 analyses:
150  STAGED
97   SUCCEEDED (Unprotected)

You could remove the listing of what was skipped if that's too verbose.

@funnell
Copy link
Collaborator

funnell commented Jun 13, 2023

to be more explicit, what I'm suggesting (incorporating your feedback @juanesarango) would be:

1. Results Unprotected

  • without --commit
STAGED 1 | SKIPPED 2 | INVALID 0

Add --commit to run 2 analyses:
1  STAGED
1  SUCCEEDED (Unprotected)
  • with --commit
RAN 2 | SKIPPED 1 | INVALID 0

2. Results Protected

  • without --commit
STAGED 1 | SKIPPED 2 | INVALID 0

Add --commit to run 1 analysis
  • with --commit
RAN 1 | SKIPPED 2 | INVALID 0

Although, I think it could actually be nice to have a summary after running with --commit as well

@funnell
Copy link
Collaborator

funnell commented Jun 13, 2023

Another comment I have, that is sort of related, is that I would actually prefer it if Isabl didn't insert analysis rows into the database until --commit. The problem I've encountered is misspecifying the filters and all of a sudden there's a bunch of unwanted analysis records.

What do you think of something like:

  1. no --commit, just check for validity and report how many new analyses would be created, how many unprotected would be run, how many are invalid
  2. with --commit, create new analysis records, and run them?

edit: #55

@funnell
Copy link
Collaborator

funnell commented Jun 13, 2023

@juanesarango I just noticed that the cli already prints this at the end of a non-commit run:

Add --commit to proceed.

so we would end up with something like this?

STAGED 1 | SKIPPED 2 | INVALID 0

Add --commit to run 2 analyses:
1  STAGED
1  SUCCEEDED (Unprotected)

Add --commit to proceed.

Perhaps the new wording should be changed then? maybe Add --commit to run 2 analyses: should be changed to something like Ready to run 2 analyses: or 2 analyses available to run:

@juanesarango
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @Keimya. I like @funnell suggestions. The whole message can be then something like:

STAGED 150 | SKIPPED 100 | INVALID 0

247 analyses available to run:
    150  STAGED
    97   SUCCEEDED (Unprotected)

Add --commit to proceed

@Keimya
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Keimya commented Jun 16, 2023

6/16/2023
Protected
Screenshot 2023-06-16 at 1 34 21 PM

Unprotected
Screenshot 2023-06-16 at 1 34 05 PM

@juanesarango juanesarango self-requested a review June 16, 2023 18:38
Copy link
Contributor

@juanesarango juanesarango left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great work @Keimya! Thanks a lot for the contribution! 🙌🏽

@juanesarango juanesarango merged commit 5a36d8e into master Jun 16, 2023
@juanesarango juanesarango deleted the update/app_output_on_commit branch June 16, 2023 18:41
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.

3 participants