-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
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
fileio related interfaces should keep bc #2539
fileio related interfaces should keep bc #2539
Conversation
Codecov ReportBase: 66.70% // Head: 66.28% // Decreases project coverage by
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 2.x #2539 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 66.70% 66.28% -0.42%
==========================================
Files 120 121 +1
Lines 7817 7963 +146
Branches 1072 1098 +26
==========================================
+ Hits 5214 5278 +64
- Misses 2436 2506 +70
- Partials 167 179 +12
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. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM.
* fileio related interfaces should keep bc * fix format * update unit tests of transforms * update format * lazily infer client until calling get function of fileio
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
PR (#2468) directly removed the
file_client_args
parameter and it causes bc issue. This PR fixes this issue.Modification
Please briefly describe what modification is made in this PR.
BC-breaking (Optional)
Does the modification introduce changes that break the backward-compatibility of the downstream repositories?
If so, please describe how it breaks the compatibility and how the downstream projects should modify their code to keep compatibility with this PR.
Use cases (Optional)
If this PR introduces a new feature, it is better to list some use cases here, and update the documentation.
Checklist
Before PR:
After PR: