Skip to content
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

Change --data type in 'rasa data validate' command #8225

Merged
merged 28 commits into from
May 12, 2021

Conversation

martasls
Copy link
Contributor

Proposed changes:

  • Change "--data" type in the 'rasa data validate' command to allow more than one path to be passed

Status (please check what you already did):

  • reformat files using black (please check Readme for instructions)

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Mar 17, 2021

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@martasls martasls marked this pull request as draft March 17, 2021 15:25
@martasls martasls marked this pull request as ready for review March 17, 2021 15:25
@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ArjaanBuijk
Opened the PR. Could you please assign yourself as reviewer as it doesn't look like I can do it from my end. Thanks!!

@martasls martasls marked this pull request as draft March 17, 2021 15:39
@ArjaanBuijk ArjaanBuijk self-requested a review March 17, 2021 15:44
@sara-tagger
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for opening a draft pull request 🚀If you have any questions, you can direct them to @JustinaPetr

@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@martasls ,
I tested your updates and they work perfect.

I think you still have to sign the Contributor License Agreement (see the link above), which must be done before we can merge it.

@ArjaanBuijk ArjaanBuijk added this to the 2.5 Rasa Open Source milestone Mar 18, 2021
@ArjaanBuijk ArjaanBuijk added area:rasa-oss/cli Issues focused on the rasa command-line-interface type:enhancement ✨ Additions of new features or changes to existing ones, should be doable in a single PR labels Mar 18, 2021
@ArjaanBuijk ArjaanBuijk marked this pull request as ready for review March 18, 2021 18:33
@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@wochinge ,
Can you have a look at the updates as well?

It all looks good to me and I tested the updates, but wanted to make sure before I merge it in.

@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@martasls ,
thanks for signing the CLA !

Copy link
Contributor

@wochinge wochinge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the contribution! Can you please add a changelog entry?

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the contribution! Can you please add a changelog entry?

Hi @wochinge, should I enter an entry under the latest version?

@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@wochinge ,
do you know why the Continuous Integration / Wait for docs test (pull_request) is failing ?

@wochinge
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @wochinge, should I enter an entry under the latest version?

A new file called 8225.improvemend.md in the changelog folder is sufficient (see the Readme here)

do you know why the Continuous Integration / Wait for docs test (pull_request) is failing ?

tbh no, but it's not required for the merge afaik.

@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@martasls ,
the cli unit tests are failing. Can you please fix them?

Eg. see these Details

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

martasls commented May 7, 2021

@martasls ,
thank you for fixing those tests. We're getting closer!

I noticed some failed tests unrelated to your updates, so I did another merge.

If that does not fix it, I will ask our QA team for help with those.

Hi Arjaan,

it does look like those failing tests are still related with converting files (using the data command). I'll try to have a look tomorrow!

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @ArjaanBuijk , could you approve the workflow? Thanks!

@mprazz
Copy link
Contributor

mprazz commented May 11, 2021

@ArjaanBuijk As far as I can see from the logs, the failures are related to the changes, or am I missing something? The errors mention the --data argument.

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ArjaanBuijk As far as I can see from the logs, the failures are related to the changes, or am I missing something? The errors mention the --data argument.

Hi @mprazz,
you're right. I've already looked into it and I'm waiting for the workflow to be approved to see if the tests are succeeding now.

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @ArjaanBuijk, test-full-model-training is failing on Windows however it looks like it's related to some package not being installed?

E          rasa.exceptions.MissingDependencyException: Not all required importable packages are installed to use the configured NLU pipeline. To use this pipeline, you need to install the missing modules: 
E             - transformers (needed for HFTransformersNLP, LanguageModelFeaturizer)
E           Please install the packages that contain the missing modules.

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

martasls commented May 12, 2021

Hi @ArjaanBuijk, only the Code Quality test is failing now. I went ahead and added docstrings for the convert_training_data method which was causing the test to fail.

Copy link
Contributor

@ArjaanBuijk ArjaanBuijk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@martasls ,

I went through everything in detail again, and it all looks great. Awesome job.

I noticed that there is a new binary file called other . Was this checked in by accident?

I saw it was added with commit 2a9b90: Fix data path in convert data method.

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

@martasls ,

I went through everything in detail again, and it all looks great. Awesome job.

I noticed that there is a new binary file called other . Was this checked in by accident?

I saw it was added with commit 2a9b90: Fix data path in convert data method.

Done!

@martasls martasls requested a review from ArjaanBuijk May 12, 2021 15:00
@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@martasls ,
nice!
once tests pass, it should be ready to go.

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

martasls commented May 12, 2021

@martasls ,
nice!
once tests pass, it should be ready to go.

Ah sorry, one last commit (hopefully). There was a blank line after the docstring.

@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@martasls ,
seems like there is still a small mypy issue in the convert.py.

Note that you can run that test locally as well with:

$ make types
rasa/nlu/convert.py:28: error: Value of type variable "AnyStr" of "exists" cannot be "Sequence[Any]"  [type-var]
Found 1 error in 1 file (checked 258 source files)
make: *** [Makefile:105: types] Error 1

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

@martasls ,
seems like there is still a small mypy issue in the convert.py.

Note that you can run that test locally as well with:

$ make types
rasa/nlu/convert.py:28: error: Value of type variable "AnyStr" of "exists" cannot be "Sequence[Any]"  [type-var]
Found 1 error in 1 file (checked 258 source files)
make: *** [Makefile:105: types] Error 1

Thanks. I wasn't aware of this mypy test. Hope it's fixed now (I ran it locally and it seemed ok)!

@ArjaanBuijk ArjaanBuijk merged commit cc3415a into RasaHQ:main May 12, 2021
@ArjaanBuijk
Copy link
Contributor

@martasls ,

It all passed and it is merged!

Thanks you so much for your contribution and getting it updated to pass all these tests.

@martasls
Copy link
Contributor Author

@martasls ,

It all passed and it is merged!

Thanks you so much for your contribution and getting it updated to pass all these tests.

Thanks for the help and availability!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:rasa-oss/cli Issues focused on the rasa command-line-interface type:enhancement ✨ Additions of new features or changes to existing ones, should be doable in a single PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Allow 'rasa data validate' to be sent a list of data paths instead of just one
6 participants