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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Send git errors to subprocess.PIPE #717

Merged
merged 0 commits into from
Nov 17, 2022
Merged

Send git errors to subprocess.PIPE #717

merged 0 commits into from
Nov 17, 2022

Conversation

austinmw
Copy link
Contributor

@austinmw austinmw commented Nov 11, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Thanks for your contribution and we appreciate it a lot. The following instructions would make your pull request more healthy and more easily get feedback. If you do not understand some items, don't worry, just make the pull request and seek help from maintainers.

Motivation

This removes frequent git errors in logs when running train script from outside of repository

Modification

Fixes #714 by sending error to subprocess instead of stderr

Checklist

  1. Pre-commit or other linting tools are used to fix the potential lint issues.
  2. The modification is covered by complete unit tests. If not, please add more unit test to ensure the correctness.
  3. If the modification has potential influence on downstream projects, this PR should be tested with downstream projects, like MMDet or MMCls.
  4. The documentation has been modified accordingly, like docstring or example tutorials.

@austinmw austinmw changed the title capture git errors Send git errors to subprocess.PIPE Nov 11, 2022
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 11, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Base: 78.41% // Head: 78.41% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (4a9df3b) compared to base (4a9df3b).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

❗ Current head 4a9df3b differs from pull request most recent head e98d262. Consider uploading reports for the commit e98d262 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #717   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   78.41%   78.41%           
=======================================
  Files         127      127           
  Lines        9178     9178           
  Branches     1826     1826           
=======================================
  Hits         7197     7197           
  Misses       1670     1670           
  Partials      311      311
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 78.41% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

HAOCHENYE
HAOCHENYE previously approved these changes Nov 16, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@HAOCHENYE HAOCHENYE left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Approved!!!
image

@HAOCHENYE HAOCHENYE added this to the 0.4.0 milestone Nov 16, 2022
@pull pull bot force-pushed the main branch 2 times, most recently from d9d2504 to e98d262 Compare November 17, 2022 14:30
@HAOCHENYE
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi, please resolve the conflicts 🚀

@HAOCHENYE HAOCHENYE added the enhancement New feature or request label Nov 17, 2022
@zhouzaida zhouzaida merged commit e98d262 into open-mmlab:main Nov 17, 2022
@austinmw
Copy link
Contributor Author

@HAOCHENYE Hi, sorry I'm not sure what happened, but it looks like my commit is gone on my fork's main branch and no changes were made with this merge. I guess I can submit identical PR?

@austinmw austinmw mentioned this pull request Nov 17, 2022
Merged
@zhouzaida
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @austinmw , i am sorry that your PR would be closed automatically when I merged other PRs. It is strange.

@austinmw
Copy link
Contributor Author

All good, looks like fix got merged, thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@HAOCHENYE HAOCHENYE HAOCHENYE left review comments

@zhouzaida zhouzaida Awaiting requested review from zhouzaida

Assignees

@HAOCHENYE HAOCHENYE

Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Milestone
0.4.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug] error - fatal: not a git repository
3 participants
@austinmw @HAOCHENYE @zhouzaida