Merged
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #74 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.39% 90.09% -0.30%
==========================================
Files 21 20 -1
Lines 406 414 +8
==========================================
+ Hits 367 373 +6
- Misses 39 41 +2 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Member
Author
|
I have been unable to make contact with a regular maintainer and so will merge this in 48 hours, as this is needed downstream and the changes seem to me fairly innocuous. Any review will be greatly appreciated, but let me know ASAP if you want to make one. |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR extends the JSON compatibility requirements, and fixes the following breakage: In the early version of JSON, the function
JSON.parsewould return aDict{String,Any}but now it returns a custom typeJSON.Object{String,Any}. WhileJSON.Objectis anAbstractDict, many type annotations for methods in MLFlowClient.jl expect aDict. I have mitigated this problem by loosening these type annotations toAbstractDict. (The only reason for having annotations at all appears to be as a guard against improper arguments, but for the internal functions this seems unnecessary. However, not being too familiar with the code base I have kept the annotations.)I have also added a warning in the Readme against using MLflow > 3.2.0, as I ran into an issue, reported at #76.