Skip to content

Downloaders #62

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

Merged
merged 22 commits into from
Jun 13, 2025
Merged

Downloaders #62

merged 22 commits into from
Jun 13, 2025

Conversation

AurelienJaquier
Copy link
Contributor

added downloader functions for

  • hoc (EModel)
  • morphology (ReconstructionMorphology)
  • mechanism (IonChannelModel)
  • all of the above at once (MEModel)

These functions were taken from me-model-analysis. Once this PR is merged, me-model-analysis will get those from here.

@AurelienJaquier AurelienJaquier self-assigned this Jun 10, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 10, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Flag Coverage Δ
pytest 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/entitysdk/downloaders/emodel.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/entitysdk/downloaders/ion_channel_model.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/entitysdk/downloaders/memodel.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/entitysdk/downloaders/morphology.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/entitysdk/schemas/memodel.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/entitysdk/types.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/entitysdk/utils/filesystem.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@eleftherioszisis
Copy link
Collaborator

A change I would suggest would be to use client.download_assets to simplify the parts that need to check for specific content_type etc.

@eleftherioszisis
Copy link
Collaborator

With #67 merged you don't need anymore to pass the token in the functions. Only the client :)

@AurelienJaquier
Copy link
Contributor Author

With #67 merged you don't need anymore to pass the token in the functions. Only the client :)

Very nice!
I modified the PR accordingly.

@AurelienJaquier
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eleftherioszisis is this PR good to be merged?

@eleftherioszisis
Copy link
Collaborator

It's pretty good to add tests :)

Copy link
Collaborator

@eleftherioszisis eleftherioszisis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@AurelienJaquier AurelienJaquier merged commit aa9cddb into main Jun 13, 2025
11 checks passed
@AurelienJaquier AurelienJaquier deleted the downloaders branch June 13, 2025 09:19
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.

2 participants