Rename container_image to image for improved UX #3094

JiangJiaWei1103 · 2025-01-25T09:46:14Z

Tracking issue

Why are the changes needed?

To enhance the user experience, the concept of container should be abstracted from flytekit users.

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

At this early stage, we propose to focus on the user-facing codebase and support both image and container_image for backward compatibility. There exist three cases:

Both image and container_image are specified: Raise an error
container_image is used: Warn users about the future deprecation
image is used: Use image directly

In the future, we can revisit whether modifying the developer-facing code is beneficial when it becomes more relevant.

How was this patch tested?

This patch has been tested using modified and newly added unit tests.

Setup process

git clone https://github.com/flyteorg/flytekit.git
gh pr checkout 3094
make setup && pip install -e .

Run all unit tests using the following command:

make unit_test

Check all the applicable boxes

I updated the documentation accordingly.
All new and existing tests passed.
All commits are signed-off.

Related PRs

NA

Docs link

Please refer to flyteorg/flyte#6211

Summary by Bito

This PR implements both the renaming of 'container_image' parameter to 'image' across Flytekit codebase and introduces comprehensive error handling improvements. Changes include deprecation warnings, secure handling of pip arguments, improved async operations, and better Kubernetes resource validation. The implementation maintains backward compatibility while adding centralized warning logic and error handling for better runtime stability.

Unit tests added: True

Estimated effort to review (1-5, lower is better): 5

1. Support both `image` and `container_image` for backward compatibility 2. Modify the core decorator used for any task type * We focus on the user-facing inteface Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

flyte-bot · 2025-01-25T09:46:28Z

Code Review Agent Run Status

Limitations and other issues: ❌ Failure - The AI Code Review Agent skipped reviewing this change because it is configured to exclude certain pull requests based on the source/target branch or the pull request status. You can change the settings here, or contact the agent instance creator at [email protected].

…tests Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

codecov · 2025-01-29T06:32:57Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.58%. Comparing base (22acc2c) to head (896553e).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3094      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   80.01%   83.58%   +3.57%     
==========================================
  Files         318        3     -315     
  Lines       27075      195   -26880     
  Branches     2779        0    -2779     
==========================================
- Hits        21663      163   -21500     
+ Misses       4647       32    -4615     
+ Partials      765        0     -765

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

flyte-bot · 2025-01-29T07:13:13Z

Code Review Agent Run Status

Limitations and other issues: ❌ Failure - The AI Code Review Agent skipped reviewing this change because it is configured to exclude certain pull requests based on the source/target branch or the pull request status. You can change the settings here, or contact the agent instance creator at [email protected].

Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

flyte-bot · 2025-01-29T08:27:44Z

Code Review Agent Run Status

Limitations and other issues: ❌ Failure - The AI Code Review Agent skipped reviewing this change because it is configured to exclude certain pull requests based on the source/target branch or the pull request status. You can change the settings here, or contact the agent instance creator at [email protected].

thomasjpfan · 2025-02-02T16:51:46Z

flytekit/core/task.py

@@ -584,6 +606,24 @@ async def eager_workflow(x: int) -> int:
            async def eager_workflow(x: int) -> int:
                ...
    """
+    # Rename the `container_image` parameter to `image` for improved user experience.


Should image be added to PythonAutoContainerTask and we do the validation there? This way @eager (through EagerAsyncPythonFunctionTask) and @task will get the check.

For backward compatible, I would have PythonAutoContainerTask._image, but have ._container_image and container_image be a mirror of it:

class PythonAutoContainerTask: def __init__(self, container_image, image): # validate image and container_image self._image = container_image @property def container_image(self): return self._image @property def _container_image(self): return self._image @_container_image.setter def _container_image(self, value): self._image = value @property def image(self): return self._image

Both work fine for me. Thanks for your suggestion--I learned a lot!

I have two questions:

Is it common practice to make a class’s internal attribute (like _container_image here) accessible and modifiable from outside the class?

I assume we do this to avoid breaking users’ code.

Would it be good to add a setter for image?

I assume we do this to avoid breaking users’ code.

I'm mostly trying to keep backward compatibility. I see bunch of code paths that does obj._container_image = . (I do not really like this practice, but that's the current state of the code base)

Would it be good to add a setter for image?

I'll say it's not worth it here. If we keep the obj._container_image = practice, then future users can do obj._image = .

Thanks for the clarification! Everything is now perfectly clear.

flyte-bot · 2025-02-02T17:24:58Z

Code Review Agent Run #e396c5

Actionable Suggestions - 3

flytekit/core/type_engine.py - 1
- Consider maintaining parameter name consistency · Line 383-383
flytekit/core/task.py - 2
- Consider consolidating duplicate image parameters · Line 108-108
- Consider consolidating duplicate image parameters · Line 148-148

Review Details

Files reviewed - 9 · Commit Range: ff7b2c5..f2ddb80
- flytekit/core/task.py
- flytekit/core/type_engine.py
- tests/flytekit/integration/jupyter/test_notebook_run.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/cli/pyflyte/image_spec_wf.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_array_node_map_task.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_python_function_task.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_serialization.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_task.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/remote/test_remote.py
Files skipped - 0
Tools
- Whispers (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- Detect-secrets (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- MyPy (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful
- Astral Ruff (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful

AI Code Review powered by

flyte-bot · 2025-02-02T17:31:22Z

Changelist by Bito

This pull request implements the following key changes.

Key Change	Files Impacted
Feature Improvement - Rename container_image parameter to image for better UX	- `python_auto_container.py` - Implemented image parameter with deprecation warning for container_image - `task.py` - Updated task decorator to use image parameter instead of container_image - `type_engine.py` - Updated custom image reference to use new image parameter
Testing - Add comprehensive tests for image parameter changes	- `test_task.py` - Added new test cases for image parameter usage and deprecation warnings - `test_serialization.py` - Updated serialization tests to use new image parameter - `test_notebook_run.py` - Updated notebook tests to use new image parameter - `image_spec_wf.py` - Updated image spec workflow tests - `test_remote.py` - Updated remote execution tests with new image parameter

flyte-bot · 2025-02-02T17:31:23Z

flytekit/core/type_engine.py

@@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ class DC:
                    a: Union[int, bool, str, float]
                    b: Union[int, bool, str, float]

-                @task(container_image=custom_image)
+                @task(image=custom_image)


Consider maintaining parameter name consistency

Consider updating the parameter name from image to container_image to maintain backward compatibility and avoid potential breaking changes for existing code.

Code suggestion

Check the AI-generated fix before applying

Suggested change

@task(image=custom_image)

@task(container_image=custom_image)

Code Review Run #e396c5

Is this a valid issue, or was it incorrectly flagged by the Agent?

it was incorrectly flagged

flyte-bot · 2025-02-02T17:31:24Z

flytekit/core/task.py

@@ -104,6 +105,7 @@ def task(
    interruptible: Optional[bool] = ...,
    deprecated: str = ...,
    timeout: Union[datetime.timedelta, int] = ...,
+    image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ...,


Consider consolidating duplicate image parameters

Consider consolidating the image and container_image parameters since they appear to serve the same purpose. Having two parameters for the same functionality could lead to confusion.

Code suggestion

Check the AI-generated fix before applying

- image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ..., - container_image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ..., + container_image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ..., # Use this instead of image parameter + image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = None, # Deprecated: Use container_image instead

Code Review Run #e396c5

Is this a valid issue, or was it incorrectly flagged by the Agent?

it was incorrectly flagged

flyte-bot · 2025-02-02T17:31:25Z

flytekit/core/task.py

@@ -143,6 +145,7 @@ def task(
    interruptible: Optional[bool] = ...,
    deprecated: str = ...,
    timeout: Union[datetime.timedelta, int] = ...,
+    image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ...,


Consider consolidating duplicate image parameters

Consider consolidating the image parameter with the existing container_image parameter to avoid semantic duplication, as both appear to serve the same purpose of specifying container images.

Code suggestion

Check the AI-generated fix before applying

- image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ..., - container_image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ..., + container_image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]] = ..., # Also accepts image parameter for backward compatibility

Code Review Run #e396c5

Is this a valid issue, or was it incorrectly flagged by the Agent?

it was incorrectly flagged

1. Validate `image` and `container_image` in `PythonAutoContainerTask`'s initializer 2. Maintain backward compatibility within `PythonAutoContainerTask` Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

flyte-bot · 2025-02-03T16:48:38Z

Code Review Agent Run #5e8094

Actionable Suggestions - 2

flytekit/core/task.py - 1
- Consider consolidating image parameters · Line 381-382
flytekit/core/python_auto_container.py - 1
- Consider consolidating duplicate image properties · Line 161-171

Review Details

Files reviewed - 2 · Commit Range: f2ddb80..bb6e187
- flytekit/core/python_auto_container.py
- flytekit/core/task.py
Files skipped - 0
Tools
- Whispers (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- Detect-secrets (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- MyPy (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful
- Astral Ruff (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful

AI Code Review powered by

flyte-bot · 2025-02-03T16:54:03Z

flytekit/core/task.py

+            image=image,
            container_image=container_image,


Consider consolidating image parameters

Consider consolidating the image parameters. Currently both image and container_image are being passed, which could lead to confusion about precedence. Since container_image is deprecated, it would be clearer to use only image.

Code suggestion

Check the AI-generated fix before applying

Suggested change

image=image,

container_image=container_image,

image=image,

Code Review Run #5e8094

Is this a valid issue, or was it incorrectly flagged by the Agent?

it was incorrectly flagged

flyte-bot · 2025-02-03T16:54:04Z

flytekit/core/python_auto_container.py

+        """Deprecated, please use `image` instead."""
+        return self._image
+
+    @property
+    def _container_image(self) -> Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]:
+        """Deprecated, please use `image` instead."""
+        return self._image
+
+    @_container_image.setter
+    def _container_image(self, image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]):
+        self._image = image


Consider consolidating duplicate image properties

Consider consolidating the duplicate property definitions for container_image and _container_image. Both properties return self._image and have the same docstring.

Code suggestion

Check the AI-generated fix before applying

- def container_image(self) -> Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]: - """Deprecated, please use `image` instead.""" - return self._image - - @property - def _container_image(self) -> Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]: - """Deprecated, please use `image` instead.""" - return self._image - - @_container_image.setter - def _container_image(self, image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]): + @property + def _container_image(self) -> Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]: + """Deprecated, please use `image` instead.""" + return self._image

Code Review Run #5e8094

Is this a valid issue, or was it incorrectly flagged by the Agent?

it was incorrectly flagged

thomasjpfan

Minor nit on adding a comment

thomasjpfan · 2025-02-04T15:04:16Z

flytekit/core/python_auto_container.py

+        return self._image
+
+    @_container_image.setter
+    def _container_image(self, image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]):


Suggested change

def _container_image(self, image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]):

def _container_image(self, image: Optional[Union[str, ImageSpec]]):

"""Deprecated, please use `image` instead."""

# This setter is for backward compatibility, so that setting `_container_image`

# will adjust the new `_image` parameter directly.

Hi Thomas,

I’ve just added it. Thanks for your guidance!

Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

flyte-bot · 2025-02-04T16:34:24Z

Code Review Agent Run #acb303

Actionable Suggestions - 0

Review Details

Files reviewed - 1 · Commit Range: bb6e187..e66743f
- flytekit/core/python_auto_container.py
Files skipped - 0
Tools
- Whispers (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- Detect-secrets (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- MyPy (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful
- Astral Ruff (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful

AI Code Review powered by

flyte-bot · 2025-02-06T13:09:45Z

Code Review Agent Run #74c115

Actionable Suggestions - 0

Additional Suggestions - 10

flytekit/models/security.py - 2
- Consider adding env_var validation check · Line 45-45
- Consider validating env_var for empty string · Line 73-73
tests/flytekit/integration/remote/workflows/basic/get_secret.py - 1
- Consider explicit error for missing env var · Line 19-20
flytekit/deck/deck.py - 1
- Add error handling for deck publishing · Line 96-96
plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/tests/k8sdataservice/test_sensor.py - 1
- Add context manager for async task · Line 25-29
plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/setup.py - 1
- Consider more specific kubernetes version range · Line 7-7
flytekit/image_spec/image_spec.py - 1
- Consider adding pip args validation · Line 86-86
tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_data_persistence.py - 1
- Consider strengthening test assertion specificity · Line 237-238
tests/flytekit/unit/types/structured_dataset/test_structured_dataset.py - 1
- Consider using constant for repeated URI · Line 704-704
plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/flytekitplugins/k8sdataservice/k8s/manager.py - 1
- Consider breaking down container creation method · Line 66-82

Review Details

Files reviewed - 74 · Commit Range: e66743f..896553e
- .pre-commit-config.yaml
- Dockerfile.agent
- docs/source/plugins/k8sstatefuldataservice.rst
- flytekit/bin/entrypoint.py
- flytekit/clients/friendly.py
- flytekit/clients/raw.py
- flytekit/clis/sdk_in_container/serve.py
- flytekit/core/base_task.py
- flytekit/core/context_manager.py
- flytekit/core/data_persistence.py
- flytekit/core/node.py
- flytekit/core/python_function_task.py
- flytekit/core/resources.py
- flytekit/core/type_engine.py
- flytekit/deck/deck.py
- flytekit/image_spec/default_builder.py
- flytekit/image_spec/image_spec.py
- flytekit/interaction/parse_stdin.py
- flytekit/loggers.py
- flytekit/models/core/workflow.py
- flytekit/models/domain.py
- flytekit/models/security.py
- flytekit/models/task.py
- flytekit/remote/remote.py
- flytekit/remote/remote_fs.py
- flytekit/tools/fast_registration.py
- flytekit/tools/translator.py
- flytekit/types/directory/types.py
- flytekit/types/structured/structured_dataset.py
- plugins/flytekit-envd/flytekitplugins/envd/image_builder.py
- plugins/flytekit-envd/tests/test_image_spec.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/dev-requirements.txt
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/flytekitplugins/k8sdataservice/__init__.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/flytekitplugins/k8sdataservice/agent.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/flytekitplugins/k8sdataservice/k8s/kube_config.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/flytekitplugins/k8sdataservice/k8s/manager.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/flytekitplugins/k8sdataservice/sensor.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/flytekitplugins/k8sdataservice/task.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/setup.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/tests/k8sdataservice/k8s/test_kube_config.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/tests/k8sdataservice/k8s/test_manager.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/tests/k8sdataservice/test_agent.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/tests/k8sdataservice/test_sensor.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/tests/k8sdataservice/test_task.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/tests/k8sdataservice/utils/test_resources.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/utils/infra.py
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/utils/resources.py
- plugins/flytekit-omegaconf/flytekitplugins/omegaconf/dictconfig_transformer.py
- plugins/flytekit-omegaconf/tests/test_dictconfig_transformer.py
- plugins/flytekit-ray/flytekitplugins/ray/task.py
- plugins/flytekit-ray/setup.py
- plugins/flytekit-ray/tests/test_ray.py
- plugins/setup.py
- pydoclint-errors-baseline.txt
- pyproject.toml
- tests/flytekit/clis/sdk_in_container/test_serve.py
- tests/flytekit/integration/remote/test_remote.py
- tests/flytekit/integration/remote/workflows/basic/get_secret.py
- tests/flytekit/integration/remote/workflows/basic/sd_attr.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/image_spec/test_default_builder.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_array_node_map_task.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_data_persistence.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_dataclass.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_generice_idl_type_engine.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_list.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_map_task.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_node_creation.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_resources.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_type_engine.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/core/test_unions.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/deck/test_deck.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/extras/pydantic_transformer/test_pydantic_basemodel_transformer.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/test_translator.py
- tests/flytekit/unit/types/structured_dataset/test_structured_dataset.py
Files skipped - 2
- .github/workflows/pythonbuild.yml - Reason: Filter setting
- plugins/flytekit-k8sdataservice/README.md - Reason: Filter setting
Tools
- Whispers (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- Detect-secrets (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
- MyPy (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful
- Astral Ruff (Static Code Analysis) - ✔︎ Successful

AI Code Review powered by

refactor: Rename container_image to image for improved UX

ff7b2c5

1. Support both `image` and `container_image` for backward compatibility 2. Modify the core decorator used for any task type * We focus on the user-facing inteface Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

refactor: Use image instead of container_image in task decorator for …

5f790d6

…tests Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

JiangJiaWei1103 added 3 commits January 29, 2025 15:24

test: Test image attr in task and dynamic decorators

f5a72f7

Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

test: Test image attr in eager decorator

0eb643d

Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

Recover plugins-related interface

f2ddb80

Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

JiangJiaWei1103 changed the title ~~[WIP] Rename container_image to image for improved UX~~ Rename container_image to image for improved UX Feb 2, 2025

JiangJiaWei1103 marked this pull request as ready for review February 2, 2025 16:22

JiangJiaWei1103 requested review from wild-endeavor, kumare3, eapolinario, pingsutw, cosmicBboy, samhita-alla, thomasjpfan and Future-Outlier as code owners February 2, 2025 16:22

thomasjpfan reviewed Feb 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

flyte-bot reviewed Feb 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

refactor: Move validation logic into PythonAutoContainerTask

bb6e187

1. Validate `image` and `container_image` in `PythonAutoContainerTask`'s initializer 2. Maintain backward compatibility within `PythonAutoContainerTask` Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

JiangJiaWei1103 mentioned this pull request Feb 3, 2025

[Docs] Rename container_image to image for improved UX flyteorg/flyte#6211

Open

3 tasks

flyte-bot reviewed Feb 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

pingsutw previously approved these changes Feb 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

JiangJiaWei1103 mentioned this pull request Feb 4, 2025

Rename container_image to image for improved UX flyteorg/flytesnacks#1779

Open

thomasjpfan previously approved these changes Feb 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

docs: Add docstring for _container_image setter

e66743f

Signed-off-by: JiangJiaWei1103 <[email protected]>

JiangJiaWei1103 dismissed stale reviews from thomasjpfan and pingsutw via e66743f February 4, 2025 15:31

Merge branch 'master' into rename-image-for-container-ux

896553e

thomasjpfan approved these changes Feb 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Rename container_image to image for improved UX #3094

Rename container_image to image for improved UX #3094

JiangJiaWei1103 commented Jan 25, 2025 •

edited by flyte-bot

Loading

flyte-bot commented Jan 25, 2025

codecov bot commented Jan 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

flyte-bot commented Jan 29, 2025

flyte-bot commented Jan 29, 2025

thomasjpfan Feb 2, 2025

JiangJiaWei1103 Feb 3, 2025

thomasjpfan Feb 3, 2025

JiangJiaWei1103 Feb 4, 2025

flyte-bot commented Feb 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Code Review Agent Run #e396c5

flyte-bot commented Feb 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Changelist by Bito

flyte-bot Feb 2, 2025

flyte-bot Feb 2, 2025

flyte-bot Feb 2, 2025

flyte-bot commented Feb 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Code Review Agent Run #5e8094

flyte-bot Feb 3, 2025

flyte-bot Feb 3, 2025

thomasjpfan left a comment

thomasjpfan Feb 4, 2025

JiangJiaWei1103 Feb 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

flyte-bot commented Feb 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Code Review Agent Run #acb303

flyte-bot commented Feb 6, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Code Review Agent Run #74c115

	@task(image=custom_image)
	@task(container_image=custom_image)

Rename container_image to image for improved UX #3094

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Rename container_image to image for improved UX #3094

Conversation

JiangJiaWei1103 commented Jan 25, 2025 • edited by flyte-bot Loading

Tracking issue

Why are the changes needed?

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

How was this patch tested?

Setup process

Check all the applicable boxes

Related PRs

Docs link

Summary by Bito

flyte-bot commented Jan 25, 2025

Code Review Agent Run Status

codecov bot commented Jan 29, 2025 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

flyte-bot commented Jan 29, 2025

Code Review Agent Run Status

flyte-bot commented Jan 29, 2025

Code Review Agent Run Status

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

flyte-bot commented Feb 2, 2025 • edited Loading

Code Review Agent Run #e396c5

flyte-bot commented Feb 2, 2025 • edited Loading

Changelist by Bito

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

flyte-bot commented Feb 3, 2025 • edited Loading

Code Review Agent Run #5e8094

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

thomasjpfan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JiangJiaWei1103 Feb 4, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

flyte-bot commented Feb 4, 2025 • edited Loading

Code Review Agent Run #acb303

flyte-bot commented Feb 6, 2025 • edited Loading

Code Review Agent Run #74c115

JiangJiaWei1103 commented Jan 25, 2025 •

edited by flyte-bot

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

flyte-bot commented Feb 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

flyte-bot commented Feb 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

flyte-bot commented Feb 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

JiangJiaWei1103 Feb 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

flyte-bot commented Feb 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

flyte-bot commented Feb 6, 2025 •

edited

Loading