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

Release v0.5.2 #150

Merged
merged 148 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024
Merged

Release v0.5.2 #150

merged 148 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024

Conversation

Bachibouzouk
Copy link
Collaborator

@Bachibouzouk Bachibouzouk commented Jun 3, 2024

  • The changelog should be filled here
  • The version number should be bumped
  • Test release should be performed with release candidates

mohammadamint and others added 30 commits March 18, 2024 10:57
try fix the issue with test-pypi
solve the similar issue of test-pypi with the workflow in the publish-pypi workflow
…ease-issue-1

Update python-pypi-test.yml
Skip appliance if func_time==0 or rand_time==0
- in Appliance -> .update_daily_use:
  - duration of switch-on event is corrected to be only as long as duty cylce
  - corrected duration of switch-on event is returned
- in Appliance -> .generate_load_profile
  - calculation of total time of operation is performed using corrected duration of switch-on event
- Introduce current_duty_cycle_id as attribute of Appliance to
keep track of the current duty cycle and avoid re-evaluating
which duty-cycle is concerned by a switch on event
- Change x in range(a,b) to a <= x < b as the latter is about 5 times
faster 243 ns vs 51.4 ns
- Remove direct mention of specific issue in the comments
As now indexes are not updated by update daily_use but by
rand_switch_on_window, it is less risky for backward compatibility
to update the total time before entering the loop
When this parameter is set to False (default) te behavior should
be the same as previously, i.e. continuous duty cyles during the
entire switch on event (can contain several duty cycles).

Only when set to True would the switch on event be limited to the
duration of the duty cycle in order to better model productive use
of appliances (mill, welder)
It needs to be run from the root of the repository
Fix/duty cycle repetition for productive use
to ensure the Back-compatibility with legacy code, the Appliance method
of User class is present. However the method is not further maintained
since the nex-gen version of the sofware. To warn the users to move
towards the new method, a DeprecationWarning is added.
@FLomb
Copy link
Contributor

FLomb commented Jun 5, 2024

Hi,

Some issues I detected:

  • The conversion of .py files into .xlsx files is not working again. The code looks for modules instead of files, even though we had already fixed this bug before. Apparently, it was reintroduced at some point through other means because the lines that caused the error in the past are not there anymore.
  • The qualitative testing functionality is not working due to some broken paths in what test_run.py tries to do.
  • In the docs, in 'RAMP introduction/contributing', we provide a link to the 'Contribution guidelines'. However, the link is broken - not sure if this is the case only because I am looking at the docs generated within the PR.

@Bachibouzouk
Copy link
Collaborator Author

  • The qualitative testing functionality is not working due to some broken paths in what test_run.py tries to do.

Test_run is only supposed to be runnable if you are developping and installed ramp locally with pip install -e .

@Bachibouzouk
Copy link
Collaborator Author

  • In the docs, in 'RAMP introduction/contributing', we provide a link to the 'Contribution guidelines'. However, the link is broken - not sure if this is the case only because I am looking at the docs generated within the PR.

This one at least works locally, it is most certainly a problem of file path, or maybe we need to push the copy of the Contribute.md file as well (locally the file is copied and included in the index directly as wagtail allows a mix and match of .rst and .md files)

@FLomb
Copy link
Contributor

FLomb commented Jun 5, 2024

  • The qualitative testing functionality is not working due to some broken paths in what test_run.py tries to do.

Test_run is only supposed to be runnable if you are developping and installed ramp locally with pip install -e .

I've also tried using a developer version installed locally, but it still doesn't work. The BASE_PATH that it uses to create the TEST_OUTPUT_PATH gets messed up and points to a completely wrong location. I have pasted below the error message to give you an idea:

line 97, in <module>
    for file in os.listdir(TEST_OUTPUT_PATH):
FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/fl/miniconda3/envs/ramp_test_2/lib/python3.10/site-packages/rampdemand-0.5.2-py3.10.egg/ramp/test/results'

Bachibouzouk and others added 19 commits June 5, 2024 15:36
Previously the mean of the index range was computed and see if it was
falling within a duty cycle. This method compare the boundaries of the
range with the one of each duty cycle to know if there is an
intersection. If there is one, the duty cycle is chosen.

Note: this method does not take into account the case where the indexes
range spans accross more than one duty cycle.
With some pre-commit linting fixes on previous releases
So that twine check dist/* does not output errors.

Pre-commit removed trailing spaces in the file as well
@Bachibouzouk Bachibouzouk marked this pull request as ready for review June 7, 2024 13:09
@Bachibouzouk Bachibouzouk requested a review from FLomb June 7, 2024 13:10
Copy link
Contributor

@FLomb FLomb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've tested the PR, and it works smoothly; thanks for the work, @Bachibouzouk

@Bachibouzouk Bachibouzouk merged commit 13e0cee into main Jun 7, 2024
3 checks passed
@Bachibouzouk Bachibouzouk deleted the release/0.5.2 branch June 7, 2024 13:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants