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

[DOCS] Revise "Try GX" for GX 1.0 #9897

Merged
merged 15 commits into from May 14, 2024
Merged

Conversation

Rachel-Reverie
Copy link
Contributor

Description

  • Adds an example script that allows people to try various Expectations using provided data.
  • Adds corresponding documentation that lets the user install and run GX.

Definition of done

  • PR title is prefixed with one of: [BUGFIX], [FEATURE], [DOCS], [MAINTENANCE], [CONTRIB]
  • Code is linted - run invoke lint (uses ruff format + ruff check)
  • Appropriate tests and docs have been updated

Copy link

netlify bot commented May 7, 2024

Deploy Preview for niobium-lead-7998 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 0217086
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/niobium-lead-7998/deploys/6643716d2c7c7f0008c6cb4a
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-9897.docs.greatexpectations.io
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 7, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 77.33%. Comparing base (aad13e6) to head (0217086).
Report is 19 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #9897      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    77.94%   77.33%   -0.61%     
===========================================
  Files          494      490       -4     
  Lines        42440    41659     -781     
===========================================
- Hits         33080    32218     -862     
- Misses        9360     9441      +81     
Flag Coverage Δ
3.10 63.57% <ø> (-0.76%) ⬇️
3.10 athena or clickhouse or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds ?
3.10 big ?
3.10 databricks ?
3.10 filesystem ?
3.10 mssql ?
3.10 mysql ?
3.10 postgresql ?
3.10 snowflake ?
3.10 spark ?
3.10 trino ?
3.11 63.57% <ø> (-0.76%) ⬇️
3.11 athena or clickhouse or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds 53.68% <ø> (-0.42%) ⬇️
3.11 aws_deps 44.71% <ø> (-0.30%) ⬇️
3.11 big 54.26% <ø> (-1.71%) ⬇️
3.11 databricks 45.90% <ø> (-0.29%) ⬇️
3.11 filesystem 59.06% <ø> (-1.87%) ⬇️
3.11 mssql 48.78% <ø> (-0.21%) ⬇️
3.11 mysql 48.83% <ø> (-0.21%) ⬇️
3.11 postgresql 52.71% <ø> (-0.17%) ⬇️
3.11 snowflake 46.54% <ø> (-0.26%) ⬇️
3.11 spark 56.32% <ø> (-1.16%) ⬇️
3.11 trino 50.77% <ø> (-0.19%) ⬇️
3.8 63.59% <ø> (-0.76%) ⬇️
3.8 athena or clickhouse or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds 53.69% <ø> (-0.42%) ⬇️
3.8 aws_deps 44.73% <ø> (-0.30%) ⬇️
3.8 big 54.27% <ø> (-1.72%) ⬇️
3.8 databricks 45.92% <ø> (-0.29%) ⬇️
3.8 filesystem 59.07% <ø> (-1.87%) ⬇️
3.8 mssql 48.76% <ø> (-0.21%) ⬇️
3.8 mysql 48.82% <ø> (-0.21%) ⬇️
3.8 postgresql 52.70% <ø> (-0.17%) ⬇️
3.8 snowflake 46.55% <ø> (-0.26%) ⬇️
3.8 spark 56.28% <ø> (-1.16%) ⬇️
3.8 trino 50.75% <ø> (-0.20%) ⬇️
3.9 63.59% <ø> (-0.76%) ⬇️
3.9 athena or clickhouse or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds ?
3.9 aws_deps ?
3.9 big ?
3.9 databricks ?
3.9 filesystem ?
3.9 mssql ?
3.9 mysql ?
3.9 postgresql ?
3.9 spark ?
3.9 trino ?
cloud 0.00% <ø> (ø)
docs-basic 47.43% <ø> (-1.60%) ⬇️
docs-creds-needed 48.50% <ø> (-1.97%) ⬇️
docs-spark 47.16% <ø> (-1.39%) ⬇️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@billdirks billdirks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The general structure looks good. I left 2 comments inline.

docs/docusaurus/docs/core/introduction/try_gx.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/docusaurus/docs/core/introduction/try_gx.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Rachel-Reverie and others added 5 commits May 9, 2024 06:49
…t was causing errors; draft of the "Try GX" procedure.
…il to the sample script, more details to the guide's "Try GX" procedure, a section for "Next steps", and makes minor changes to labels in the ToC.
Copy link
Contributor

@kwcanuck kwcanuck left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Feel free to implement or ignore the recommendations. If you have questions, let me know.

@Rachel-Reverie Rachel-Reverie added this pull request to the merge queue May 14, 2024
Merged via the queue into develop with commit 8011451 May 14, 2024
63 checks passed
@Rachel-Reverie Rachel-Reverie deleted the d/doc-730/try_gx_for_1-0 branch May 14, 2024 15:40
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.

None yet

4 participants