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

Revisions/ To Do List For Milestone 4 #54

Closed
merari95 opened this issue Jan 31, 2025 · 1 comment
Closed

Revisions/ To Do List For Milestone 4 #54

merari95 opened this issue Jan 31, 2025 · 1 comment
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@merari95
Copy link
Collaborator

merari95 commented Jan 31, 2025

To Do:
-MIT License
-(Paramveer) Secrets

Communal Issues

-(Paramveer) There is no instructions on README about how to run the tests and how to run functions [2]
-(Paramveer) For the badges, a documentation status badge is present, but badges for continuous integration, test coverage, supported Python versions, and current package version are missing.: Would be nice to also add python, codecov, and ci-cd badges as requested by pyOpenSci platform standard practice.
-(Paramveer) package version 1.1.0 should be mentioned. In readme
-(Merari) There's a file linreg_ally.py which is empty;
-(Merari) Please include team members full name in relevant files in package set up and repo; author full names should be included instead of just first names
-(Merari) In the README.md, it would be nice to arrange the functions in the same order analysis should be carried as these functions are likely used in sequential order for the evaluation to make sense. For example, a dataset that failed multicollinearity check (multicollinearity) would not need to run regression function (run_linear_regression).
-(Paramveer) I deducted 1 point for [1] inconsistent use of code formatting in README file. sometimes the package name is refered to as plain word: linreg_ally, sometimes it's referred to as backtick code: linreg_ally, please be consistent in README file

Alex:
-There is missing documentation/comments for a test suite for a given function test_multicollinearity.py, making it difficult for a new developer to easily and quickly understand the test suite
-The edge cases such as datasets with a single feature, datasets with highly correlated but not perfectly collinear features, datasets with missing or NaN values can be considered in test_multicollinearity.py
-Some of the parts in the read_the_docs is not correctly rendered (multicollinearity section, 2nd paragraph)
-check_multicollinearity function outputs different metrics when passed in different arguments, which is a very cool and useful functionality.
-for some of the test python scripts ("tests/test_multicollinearity.py", "tests/test_multicollinearity_wrong_input.py") are not well documented. A
-docstrings missing for test functions. if added, can reduce the time taken for people working on the project to understand what the tests are doing.
-check_multicollinearity" function did not check if input variables are of the correct datatype
-There is latex issue in multicollinearity function tutorial for VIF, please fix.
-for "test_multicollinearity_wrong_input.py" did not test for if the input variabales are as expected, and if errors are raised when the input variable is not of an expected data type (e.g., expect train_df as dataframe but user uses a list)

Cheng:
-update documentation
-too many things in function

@merari95
Copy link
Collaborator Author

merari95 commented Feb 4, 2025

We finished all out tasks! Great job team!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants