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

SDK - Made description and name parameters optional in the @pipeline decorator #1335

Conversation

Ark-kun
Copy link
Contributor

@Ark-kun Ark-kun commented May 15, 2019

The explicit pipeline name and description are not really necessary since the name can be taken from the pipeline function name and the description - from the docstring.

The PR reduces the amount of boilerplate the pipeline creator needs to write to make a valid pipeline (that the command-line tools will recognize).

This change is Reviewable

@hongye-sun
Copy link
Contributor

Could you add some description on the reason for the change or bug it fixes?

@Ark-kun
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ark-kun commented May 16, 2019

Could you add some description on the reason for the change or bug it fixes?

Updated the description.

@hongye-sun
Copy link
Contributor

thanks.

/lgtm

@Ark-kun
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ark-kun commented May 16, 2019

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Ark-kun

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 8382595 into kubeflow:master May 16, 2019
@Ark-kun Ark-kun deleted the SDK---Made-description-and-name-parameters-optional-in-the-@pipeline-decorator branch May 17, 2019 02:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants