Closed deepakunni3 closed 4 years ago
@kshefchek Fixed the Behave tests but Travis is failing because biolink-api:master
now relies on ontobio:master
instead of a stable release of Ontobio, which is what requirements.txt
specifies.
Maybe we should have travis test the master version of ontobio? Is there a reason to have biolink coupled to an older version of ontobio?
Ontobio is actively being developed as part of Gene Ontology and Monarch. Locking the requirements.txt was to avoid any issues that might be introduced with new changes to Ontobio.
Are you suggesting we just have two requirements.txt,
@deepakunni3 whatever you think is best. I develop biolink against the master branch of ontobio, and in Monarch we test both master versions of ontobio and biolink on api-dev, and then update production when this is stable.
I've bumped the ontobio version if you'd like to pull from master and see if the tests pass
there are still 4 behave tests failing, but let's merge and fix these in the next PR
Does this address and close #223 now? Or do we need to wait for the updated PR?
partially -- we'll need to update the UI to use biolink instead of scigraph
This PR implements two new routes:
api/annotate
, which callsscigraph/annotations
api/annotate/entities
, which callsscigraph/annotations/entities
Both GET and POST are implemented for these routes.
See https://github.com/biolink/biolink-api/issues/223 for related discussion.