-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 86
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
Numerical stability of beta model #2257
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2257 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 98.70% 91.52% -7.19%
==========================================
Files 11 20 +9
Lines 4022 11337 +7315
Branches 907 2304 +1397
==========================================
+ Hits 3970 10376 +6406
- Misses 28 523 +495
- Partials 24 438 +414
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
LGTM. Can you update the CHANGELOG please to note this bugfix? Shall we push out a quick bugfix release? |
I'm guessing that the CHANGELOG should have an entry along these lines:
But what should the header be? All existing entries are written under version numbers of the corresponding release, and this one doesn't have one (at least yet). I'm happy for you to enter this in too if that's quicker than explaining the process to me @jeromekelleher. As for whether to release a bugfix, I have no idea what that entails so happy to leave the decision to you. I doubt this is having a big impact and waiting a little while is unlikely to cause havoc if it would be simpler to wait until a more substantial release is ready. |
It is as simple as providing a provisional header @JereKoskela. |
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.
Perfect, thanks @JereKoskela
OK, maybe just squash those commits now @JereKoskela and we'll merge. I think we'll just pop out a quick release. This is the only change and it's easy to do. Are you happy to shepherd the release process @GertjanBisschop ? |
dcf123a
to
fdc169c
Compare
Squash done. Over to you @jeromekelleher and @GertjanBisschop |
Fixing a bias in Beta-coalescent TMRCAs due to numerical issues with acceptance probabilities.
Closes #2256