-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.4k
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
Improved docs for Loggers #1484
Improved docs for Loggers #1484
Conversation
Hello @awaelchli! Thanks for updating this PR. There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! 🍻 Comment last updated at 2020-04-16 13:19:02 UTC |
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.
Great work!
not sure but I think that doctest in RST files are not executed, so there is no need of converting them here
@Borda |
sure add it to CI :] |
Hey @jakubczakon do you know how I could make the doctest pass in online mode without complaining about an invalid api key?
|
Hi @awaelchli, I think the reason could be:
Also, the fact that Could you please paste the particular piece of code that is causing the problem? |
@jakubczakon AWESOME. Your tipp with the version update did the trick! I didn't see it fail locally because I had the new version and the CI tests with minimal requirements. |
@Borda The doctest extension is already in |
sounds fair to do it extra PR... I would maybe run in pytest then sphinx... UPDATE: #1511 |
This pull request is now in conflict... :( |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1484 +/- ##
======================================
Coverage 91% 91%
======================================
Files 67 67
Lines 3754 3754
======================================
Hits 3408 3408
Misses 346 346 |
This pull request is now in conflict... :( |
This reverts commit a45aeb4.
@awaelchli rebase to master shall fix it... |
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.
add tests of RST files in GH action and CircleCI
@Borda about RST files: could I do that in another PR? on master "make doctest" has many errors (including RST) that would need to be solved and I think it would be better to do in another PR. What do you think? |
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.
so pls make it an issue linked to #714 so we do not forget...
because now it seems as these examples shall be tested (because they are formatted as doctest) but in fact, they are not... lol
I already added a note in #714 as a reminder 2 days ago. |
* improve __init__ * improve logger base * improve comet logger docs * improved docs for mlflow * improved nepune logger docs * fix matplotlib import issue * improve tensorboard docs * improve docs for test tube * improved trains logger docs * improve wandb logger docs * improved docs in experiment_logging.rst * added MLflow to the list of loggers * fix too long lines * fix trains doctest * fix neptune doctest * fix mlflow doctest * Apply suggestions from code review Co-Authored-By: Jirka Borovec <Borda@users.noreply.github.com> * Apply suggestions from code review * fix whitespace * try bypass mode for neptune (fix doctest api key error) * try "test" as api key * Revert "try "test" as api key" This reverts commit fd77db2. * try test as api key * update neptune docs * bump neptune minimal version * revert unnecessary bypass code * test if CI runs doctests in .rst files * Revert "test if CI runs doctests in .rst files" This reverts commit a45aeb4. * add doctest directive * neptune demo links * added tutorial link for W&B * fix line too long * fix merge error * fix merge error * add instructions how to install loggers * add instructions how to install the loggers * hide _abc_impl property from docs * review Borda, 4 spaces * indentation in example sections * blank Co-authored-by: Jirka Borovec <Borda@users.noreply.github.com>
Before submitting
What does this PR do?
A continuation of a series of doc improvements. Follows #1389, #1370, #1483
PR review
Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.
Did you have fun?
Make sure you had fun coding 🙃