-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 84
Dev updates #674
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
Dev updates #674
Conversation
Co-authored-by: GiovanniCanali <[email protected]>
Changed pull request trigger to pull_request_target and enabled coverage publishing.
* vectorize Cox - de Boor recursion Co-authored-by: Filippo Olivo <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: ajacoby9 <[email protected]> * fix logic and extend tests * add b-spline surface --------- Co-authored-by: Filippo Olivo <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: GiovanniCanali <[email protected]>
This reverts commit 0844282.
Co-authored-by: Filippo Olivo <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: ajacoby9 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: dario-coscia <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: dario-coscia <[email protected]>
|
@GiovanniCanali ready to merge on my side |
|
@FilippoOlivo @ndem0 we need an extra review before merging |
|
@dario-coscia @GiovanniCanali I am a bit concerned about introducing codacy "errors". Moreover, I would remove support for python 3.9 in this PR |
I agree on dropping Python 3.9. Regarding the Codacy errors, I don’t see any real concern there. Also, manually disabling them wouldn’t really solve the issue — it would just hide it. |
|
@FilippoOlivo Maybe we can start a discussion on this and decide what is the best strategy. Manually disabling is a bit hacky |
II think we could take another look at the Codacy rules and maybe tweak them a bit. We can talk about it sometime soon. For the case of #602, I think it’s fine to disable the Codacy warning since there’s not really a smart way to avoid it. |
We can also think of dropping Codacy and relying only on the coverage given by the linter. The best option in any case is to do an open discussion (feel free to open it) where we analyse the different proposals. For this dev update, I don't see the urge need to avoid a few Codacy errors; again, it is better to have a collective agreement rather than twisting the current rules |
Update version due to py3.9 dropping
Description
This PR fixes:
#548
#609
#616
#659
#661
#668
#675
#677
Checklist