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

[RFC] Use papermill for running tutorials #1706

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

esantorella
Copy link
Member

Motivation

We are using nbconvert to run tutorials. nbconvert is not really made for this use case, but papermill is, so we have some handwritten code than can be handled by papermill. With papermill, we can go a bit further and use SMOKE_TEST as a parameter rather than an environment variable. That would make it easy for people to work with the tutorials as notebooks.

Test Plan

Ran tutorials locally and made sure smoke-test flag was getting used appropriately.

Related pull requests

Enabling papermill will make #1703, which automates running a notebook, a bit easier.

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot added the CLA Signed Do not delete this pull request or issue due to inactivity. label Feb 27, 2023
@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@esantorella has imported this pull request. If you are a Meta employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Summary:
## Motivation

We are using nbconvert to run tutorials. nbconvert is not really made for this use case, but papermill is, so we have some handwritten code than can be handled by papermill. With papermill, we can go a bit further and use SMOKE_TEST as a [parameter](https://papermill.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage-parameterize.html) rather than an environment variable. That would make it easy for people to work with the tutorials as notebooks.

Pull Request resolved: pytorch#1706

Test Plan:
Ran tutorials locally and made sure smoke-test flag was getting used appropriately.

## Related pull requests

Enabling papermill will make pytorch#1703, which automates running a notebook, a bit easier.

Reviewed By: saitcakmak

Differential Revision: D43631568

Pulled By: esantorella

fbshipit-source-id: 66fbcca511beb9f46cc281c0ba74a27e4c86e46d
@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D43631568

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 9, 2023

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (main@af93f40). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 8952fa9 differs from pull request most recent head 5bf421e. Consider uploading reports for the commit 5bf421e to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##             main     #1706   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage        ?   100.00%           
========================================
  Files           ?       170           
  Lines           ?     14632           
  Branches        ?         0           
========================================
  Hits            ?     14632           
  Misses          ?         0           
  Partials        ?         0           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@esantorella merged this pull request in eaa6fb2.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CLA Signed Do not delete this pull request or issue due to inactivity. Merged
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants