-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 184
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
Update to FIT SDK v20.35 #31
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@dtcooper Anyone got time to look at this one? |
@liamjm I've just had a look but it's pretty much impossible to do a thorough full review of a +/- 5000 change diff. Some questions:
A few stray thoughts on making diffs easier going forward:
@dtcooper thoughts? |
I trust your judgement, @pR0Ps. But I would like to see this file programatically generated, or if things need to happen by hand, then a clear documented process to generate the profile. |
Hey, This change was generated by the generate_profile.py, which required a few tweaks to parse the latest SDK version. But yes, it is crazy big and unreasonable to expect manual review.
|
Quick update:
|
Fear not, @liamjm! I have pretty much every fit SDK released. Drop me a
line at [email protected], if you want to rework the generate profile
script from the excel files contained therein, I'll send 'em your way.
D
…On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 8:17 PM Liam Murphy ***@***.***> wrote:
Quick update:
- Adding of the test files is in #40
<#40>
- The previous versions of the SDK aren't publicly accessible (though
I have asked https://www.thisisant.com/forum/viewthread/6968/). This
means I'm unable to re-produce the v20.33 Profile. I have generated the
v20.54 by using python3 and there are much less diffs. I'll update the docs
to explain this.
- We'll need to work out the best way to produce stable sorting of the
field, I've not looked at that yet.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#31 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA1V2OIKq5HmntajhL4QtZNG0nSBE-1Aks5tHvPVgaJpZM4OFL-d>
.
|
What about to split |
This required a few tweaks to generate_profile.py.
There are a large number of diffs in the final profile.py. This is caused by the presence of more "group_name" in the message list, which affect the key in the comparator for the sorted() function.
This is annoying as it makes it hard to really diff. Let me know if you have other thoughts on this.