search

WilhelmusLab / ice-floe-tracker-pipeline

Processing pipeline for IceFloeTracker.jl
1 stars 2 forks source link

chore: add Git attributes for LFS #120

Closed cpaniaguam closed 7 months ago

cpaniaguam commented 8 months ago

This will reduce the overall size of the repo. More in #119

I'll probably do this for the IFT repo as well.

Selected .png, .tiff, .dat, and .jls file types to be managed by Git LFS. These are the data file extensions used for testing. See how this is handled in the .gitattributes file.

After merging this PR, these file types will be handled by Git LFS. This means that when these files are added, committed, and pushed, they will be stored on a remote server, and text pointers will be stored in the Git repository.

Please note that to work with these large files, contributors will need to have Git LFS installed on their local machine.

codecov[bot] commented 8 months ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 94.88%. Comparing base (e40bf7f) to head (09330ff).

Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #120 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 94.88% 94.88% ======================================= Files 7 7 Lines 215 215 ======================================= Hits 204 204 Misses 11 11 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

cpaniaguam commented 8 months ago

There might be a problem with using LFS. It seems like the org would be over quota if these files were to be added :/

danielmwatkins commented 8 months ago

It's worth a conversation to see what datasets we'd want to have as test datasets. One approach we could take would be to use a, say, 500 or 250 km square subset of the test images, where we are sure there are enough detected floes for the tests to still work. That could cut the overall dataset size by a factor of 4.

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 11:44 AM Carlos Paniagua @.***> wrote:

There might be a problem with using LFS. It seems like the org would be over quota if these files were to be added :/

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/WilhelmusLab/ice-floe-tracker-pipeline/pull/120#issuecomment-2027403565, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB6TAUITKADOWXHZRAV6W2DY2WD57AVCNFSM6AAAAABFOSAMKOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAMRXGQYDGNJWGU . You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID: @.***>

danielmwatkins commented 8 months ago

That would also have a benefit of making it faster to run the tests.

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 11:54 AM Daniel Watkins @.***> wrote:

It's worth a conversation to see what datasets we'd want to have as test datasets. One approach we could take would be to use a, say, 500 or 250 km square subset of the test images, where we are sure there are enough detected floes for the tests to still work. That could cut the overall dataset size by a factor of 4.

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 11:44 AM Carlos Paniagua @.***> wrote:

There might be a problem with using LFS. It seems like the org would be over quota if these files were to be added :/

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/WilhelmusLab/ice-floe-tracker-pipeline/pull/120#issuecomment-2027403565, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB6TAUITKADOWXHZRAV6W2DY2WD57AVCNFSM6AAAAABFOSAMKOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAMRXGQYDGNJWGU . You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID: @.***>