Closed martinkim0 closed 7 months ago
For whoever reviews this: is there a particular reason that intersphinx mappings are not used in some parts of the docs such as here? Otherwise, I can add changes for those in this PR too.
particular reason that intersphinx mappings are not used
To my knowledge, lack of clue on our part and lack of a linter in our CI.
Very happy to take the PR changes.
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Comparison is base (
d650a96
) 86.01% compared to head (d28f136
) 86.01%. Report is 2 commits behind head on main.:exclamation: Current head d28f136 differs from pull request most recent head 75d3f97. Consider uploading reports for the commit 75d3f97 to get more accurate results
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
@bkmartinjr Thanks for taking a look! I'll add the additional changes
BTW, if you know of a linter that would catch missing formatting (e.g., single quotes vs double), happy to add it to the CI
We use the Ruff linter on our end - I can put in a PR for that if that works for you!
We have ruff in our pre-commits. But at least as configured it doesn't flag this stuff for us. Happy to take a PR!! Many thanks
Changes include fixing some typos, adding or removing whitespaces for correct rendering of docs, and changing
get_census_version_directory
to useArgs:
instead ofParams:
.