-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 298
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
Add on failure parameter to imperative workflow #2908
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2908 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 76.49% 79.44% +2.94%
==========================================
Files 200 200
Lines 20901 20901
Branches 2689 2689
==========================================
+ Hits 15989 16605 +616
+ Misses 4195 3550 -645
- Partials 717 746 +29 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚨 Try these New Features:
|
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.
make lint
to lint your code- add tests to test this variable.
b35b026
to
5a07ac2
Compare
Signed-off-by: 400Ping <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: 400Ping <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: 400Ping <[email protected]>
Tracking issue
Related to flyteorg/flyte#5913
Why are the changes needed?
As the issue stated, this function is in the base class and I don't see why not to expose it to imperative workflows.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
I add a on_failure parameter in the ImperativeWorkflow class, you can see it in the commit
How was this patch tested?
Setup process
Screenshots
Check all the applicable boxes
Related PRs
flyteorg/flyte#5913
Docs link