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

ESTA Demo File Incompatibility with Current DemoParser #304

Open
ReiaDrucker opened this issue Jan 24, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

ESTA Demo File Incompatibility with Current DemoParser #304

ReiaDrucker opened this issue Jan 24, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@ReiaDrucker
Copy link

Describe the bug
ESTA JSON python dict objects have key 'matchId' and DemoParser.parse_json_to_df() expects key 'matchID'.

Include Information to Reproduce
See screen shots below. Commented out code applies the fix to make things work.

Screenshots
image
image

Additional context
I would recommend having a function to convert the ESTA json format to the current one (with default values for newly added fields) so that they are compatible with the current version of awpy.

@pnxenopoulos
Copy link
Owner

Thanks for this issue @ReiaDrucker and apologies for missing it.

I think this issue might be best directed towards the ESTA repo -- probably we should direct people to use the older version of Awpy (e.g., under v2). What do you think? The new version of Awpy will be incompatible with the ESTA data, however we will still be able to access the old under v2 versions of Awpy.

@ReiaDrucker
Copy link
Author

I think simply providing a note that ESTA data files are incompatible with Awpyv2 and to use an earlier version on the ESTA repo is a sufficient solution if you don't intend to maintain compatibility.

As a general note for awpyv2 you may want to consider forcing all strings to be lowercase to avoid similar read issues in the future or include some info about the awpy version used to generate parsed data in the files the parser produces. I mostly just wanted to bring the issue to your attention, I have no real preference for how things are handled.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants