-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
DEID-2609 Added NERTextResponse class and changes to support the NER … #41
DEID-2609 Added NERTextResponse class and changes to support the NER … #41
Conversation
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.
Based on my first comment it appears to me that you haven't tested these changes on a container. IMO you should probably make sure it works with integration testing before opening a pull request.
Could you also add integration tests to this change please 🙏
Sorry, didn't notice this was still in draft!
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.
Can you also upload the changeme with a summary of your additions?
Have a couple small comments, otherwise looks good! Are these features in prod yet? If not let's hold off merging until they're released
def ner_text(self, request_object): | ||
return self.make_request( | ||
self.request_type, self.uris.ner_text, request_object | ||
) |
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.
) | |
) | |
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.
Is there a change request in pai_requests.py? It's not appearing.
@@ -759,6 +759,37 @@ def fromdict(cls, values: dict): | |||
) | |||
|
|||
|
|||
class NerTextRequest(BaseRequestObject): | |||
default_link_batch = False |
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.
I don't see this being used. Do you want the initializer to default link_batch to this?
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.
Hey @a-guiducci , Thanks for the approval.
The NerText has most of its properties similar to ProcessText, so I have set the initializer to the same default values.
@guyd can you verify this?
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.
Ah I see what you're saying. Ok np. I think the default value for process text was removed at some point but never really cleaned up :/
If you don't mind, let's remove the default_link_batch from the NerTextRequest because we'll never use it 🙏
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.
Oh ok. Sure
…nto DEID-2609-update-the-python-client-with-the-ner-route
@AmirPAI is this PR ready to be merged? Do you need help to complete any missing pieces? |
Yes @guyd checks are done and this PR is ready to be merged. As Adam suggested, I'm holding the merge until DEID-NER branch gets merged first (which is in-turn waiting for a review from by Kory or Bryan). |
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.
Didn't take a detailed look, but seems good to me. Thanks @AmirPAI
…nto DEID-2609-update-the-python-client-with-the-ner-route
Now that NER route has been merged into master branch, I've tested it again after spinning up the container on master branch and done the tests. All tests have passed successfully. Merging! |
@AmirPAI you never addressed my CHANGELOG comment. Please open a new pr with those changes and you have now provided false information for what's in our 3.8.2 version of the client |
Disregard. I'm just updating it myself |
Hey @a-guiducci , My bad, mistakenly put those changelog summary lines in under 3.8.2 instead of 3.9.0. |
…route
What's Changed?
default_link_batch
parameter.PR Checklist