-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
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
adding comment creation support for domain layer & base repo #409
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
265b1ef
adding commentmixin to domain layer, experiment domain, base repo + test
sonaalthaker 800f623
Merge branch 'main' into comments_domain
sonaalthaker 6fd8ee7
addressing comments
sonaalthaker 3b99686
isort version updates
sonaalthaker 3a8e0ca
isort fixes
sonaalthaker File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -1212,3 +1212,43 @@ def get_tags(self, project_name, experiment_id=None, entity_identifier=None, ent | |
sorted_tag_data = [json.loads(tag_data[p]) for _, p in sorted_tag_paths] | ||
|
||
return sorted_tag_data | ||
|
||
# ---------- Comments ---------- | ||
|
||
def _get_comment_metadata_root( | ||
self, project_name, experiment_id=None, entity_identifier=None, entity_type=None | ||
): | ||
"""Returns the directory to write comments to.""" | ||
# comments and tags are currently written to the same root with a different filename | ||
return self._get_tag_metadata_root( | ||
project_name, experiment_id, entity_identifier, entity_type | ||
) | ||
|
||
def add_comments( | ||
self, project_name, comments, experiment_id=None, entity_identifier=None, entity_type=None | ||
): | ||
"""Persist comments to the configured filesystem. | ||
|
||
Parameters | ||
---------- | ||
project_name : str | ||
The name of the project the object to comment | ||
belongs to. | ||
comments : list of str | ||
The comment values to persist. | ||
experiment_id : str, optional | ||
The ID of the experiment to apply the comments | ||
`comments` to. | ||
entity_identifier : str, optional | ||
The ID or name of the entity to apply the comments | ||
`comments` to. | ||
entity_type : str, optional | ||
The name of the entity's type as returned by | ||
`entity_cls.__class__.__name__`. | ||
""" | ||
comment_metadata_root = self._get_comment_metadata_root( | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. if my comment above is correct, you could just change this to |
||
project_name, experiment_id, entity_identifier, entity_type | ||
) | ||
comment_metadata_path = f"{comment_metadata_root}/comments_{domain.utils.uuid.uuid4()}.json" | ||
|
||
self._persist_domain({"added_comments": comments}, comment_metadata_path) |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is there any difference between this and
_get_tag_metadata_root
? the metadata root is gonna be the same - you're just changing "tag" in the filename to "comment", which happens in the function you added below this one. if so, you can just have this function call_get_tag_metadata_root
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, there's no real difference. I just thought it might be good form to add a comment specific one in case we wanted to differentiate between the two more in the future, but I think it's fine to remove now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah that definitely makes sense, and I could see the comments becoming a bit more complicated. if we just do something like
we can have the best of both worlds - a new function available if it needs to change and reuse of the old one