Merged
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #176 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 68.85% 69.01% +0.15%
==========================================
Files 104 105 +1
Lines 5830 5860 +30
==========================================
+ Hits 4014 4044 +30
Misses 1816 1816
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Modifications in this PR enable a column in the dataset_dataframe (aka run_summary) called "channel_scale_factors".
This should be reviewed in future, as using "channel_scale_factors" in general is a workaround, and shouldn't normally be needed, however, over the past while in dev it has been quite useful in debugging errors in metadata.
The point is that I would like this column to be optional, so it should be tested whether this column is required and if it is then add a note to issue #175 about adding that flexibility