Refactor: Unified package structure, Development workflow enhancements, and fixes on issues. #45
      
        
          +32
        
        
          −42
        
        
          
        
      
    
  
  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  Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 is focussed on improving the ease of setting up the application for development along with fixes on some issues.
Single packaging
Currently, There are two packages that needs to be build for the functioning of the application,
gh_processorgh_explainerTesting out changes to the files inside
gh_explainerandgh_processorfolder becomes difficult because some of the scripts inside them depend on the build packages itself instead of the local function.For example,
summarise.py uses a function called
download_github_repowhich is being used from thegh_processorpackage.Let's say I want to update this function,
gh_processorpackage.This sounds cumbersome. Hence these are the following I have done in this PR,
.tomlfile for building a single package containing bothgh_processorandgh_explainer..shfile for building the package. [TODO: The end goal should be to push it in the pip repository.]Enhancements
Fixes
max_lengthvalue based on the model chosen, which fixes this issue [ ValueError due to Input Length Exceeding max_length in Summarization #22 ].