Closed mgxd closed 4 years ago
Sounds like a reasonable extra to me
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 08:44 Mathias Goncalves notifications@github.com wrote:
@mgxd commented on this pull request.
In setup.cfg https://github.com/templateflow/python-client/pull/35#discussion_r385232125 :
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ install_requires = pybids >= 0.9.2 requests tqdm
- doi2bib
Do we want to have this in the base installation or as an extra?
— You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/templateflow/python-client/pull/35?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAESDRQOQWPPSO5RP3ASC5TRE7UWBA5CNFSM4K46WYE2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWFIHK3DMKJSXC5LFON2FEZLWNFSXPKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOCXG7J5I#pullrequestreview-365819125, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAESDRUOFYETPFZTSEDQKULRE7UWBANCNFSM4K46WYEQ .
Merging #35 into master will increase coverage by
17.55%
. The diff coverage is81.81%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #35 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 67.88% 85.44% +17.55%
===========================================
Files 5 5
Lines 137 158 +21
===========================================
+ Hits 93 135 +42
+ Misses 44 23 -21
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
#api | 85.44% <81.81%> (+17.55%) |
:arrow_up: |
#config | 43.03% <0.00%> (?) |
|
#datalad | 73.41% <81.81%> (+22.32%) |
:arrow_up: |
#dls3 | 48.73% <22.72%> (-4.56%) |
:arrow_down: |
#s3 | 53.16% <22.72%> (-5.23%) |
:arrow_down: |
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
templateflow/api.py | 77.90% <81.81%> (+0.98%) |
:arrow_up: |
templateflow/conf/bids.py | 100.00% <0.00%> (+28.57%) |
:arrow_up: |
templateflow/conf/__init__.py | 92.72% <0.00%> (+41.81%) |
:arrow_up: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 2acf03d...dcbe54b. Read the comment docs.
Okay - this is ready for review
Once we drop 3.5 fully (#36), things should be working.
@oesteban did the skeleton change between the last 2 commits?
I was testing, so that's possible.
I would get #39 merged first to avoid this kind of problems
This is a proof of concept of #33
This requires a few changes to existing template descriptions:
ReferencesAndLinks
type from list to dictionary to facilitate extractionHowToAcknowledge
fields to include curly brackets with Reference IDs