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

export: Allow --node-data to be repeated to build up a file list #1010

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 19, 2022

Conversation

tsibley
Copy link
Member

@tsibley tsibley commented Jul 26, 2022

Description of proposed changes

…instead of each repetition overriding the last values. While there is some theoretical utility in being able to override one list of node data files with another in a subsequent option, I think it's more likely that repetition is intended to built up a single list. I was surprised, at least.

See also https://discussion.nextstrain.org/t/1194/4.

Testing

  • New and updated tests pass locally
  • CI passes

Checklist

  • Add a message in CHANGES.md summarizing the changes in this PR. Keep headers and formatting consistent with the rest of the file.
  • Note that this would be a backwards incompatible change in the changelog.

@tsibley
Copy link
Member Author

tsibley commented Jul 26, 2022

ISTR discussing this behaviour (or similar) before but can't recall specifics. In any case, I think the behaviour in this PR is more favorable, but it's definitely up for discussion. Are there many (any?) cases where we really do want the overriding behaviour?

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 26, 2022

Codecov Report

Base: 61.68% // Head: 59.68% // Decreases project coverage by -1.99% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (14f48ec) compared to base (862bbb6).
Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

❗ Current head 14f48ec differs from pull request most recent head de8147b. Consider uploading reports for the commit de8147b to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1010      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   61.68%   59.68%   -2.00%     
==========================================
  Files          52       53       +1     
  Lines        6287     6323      +36     
  Branches     1583     1587       +4     
==========================================
- Hits         3878     3774     -104     
- Misses       2138     2286     +148     
+ Partials      271      263       -8     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
augur/argparse_.py 82.60% <100.00%> (+3.66%) ⬆️
augur/export_v1.py 74.46% <100.00%> (+0.10%) ⬆️
augur/export_v2.py 68.93% <100.00%> (-0.11%) ⬇️
augur/io/vcf.py 42.50% <0.00%> (-43.75%) ⬇️
augur/translate.py 38.67% <0.00%> (-35.94%) ⬇️
augur/utils.py 64.25% <0.00%> (-7.36%) ⬇️
augur/dates.py 89.85% <0.00%> (-3.01%) ⬇️
augur/filter.py 95.82% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
augur/util_support/node_data_file.py 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 4 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

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

Copy link
Member

@jameshadfield jameshadfield left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems good to go from my perspective. It's not something I've come across but I agree that the interpretation of repeated --node-data should be the union of files, not simply the last one(s), and thus think it should be merged.

@tsibley tsibley force-pushed the trs/export/repeatable-node-data-option branch from 47f546f to f48f196 Compare September 19, 2022 18:31
…instead of each repetition overriding the last values.  While there is
some theoretical utility in being able to override one list of node data
files with another in a subsequent option, I think it's more likely that
repetition is intended to built up a single list.  I was surprised, at
least.

See also <https://discussion.nextstrain.org/t/1194/4>.
@tsibley tsibley force-pushed the trs/export/repeatable-node-data-option branch from f48f196 to de8147b Compare September 19, 2022 18:32
@tsibley
Copy link
Member Author

tsibley commented Sep 19, 2022

Updated the changelog in f48f196 and then rebased onto latest master to resolve conflicts before merge.

@tsibley tsibley merged commit 571ef56 into master Sep 19, 2022
@tsibley tsibley deleted the trs/export/repeatable-node-data-option branch September 19, 2022 18:33
tsibley added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2022
When resolving conflicts prior to merging¹, I didn't notice that the new
entry I was adding was now under an already-released version.

¹ #1010
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
No open projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants