-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 455
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
Create Tune API in the Katib SDK #1951
Merged
google-oss-prow
merged 6 commits into
kubeflow:master
from
andreyvelich:sdk-create-from-func
Oct 4, 2022
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
86d3a68
Create Tune API in the Katib SDK
andreyvelich 1b77b24
Add Final to consts
andreyvelich 816867b
Add GPU TF Image
andreyvelich 316d4a4
Create search module
andreyvelich 0dd7733
Fix link in README
andreyvelich bce47b9
Fix licence date
andreyvelich File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
Oops, something went wrong.
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ | ||
# Distribution / packaging | ||
dist/ |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 understand why this kind of logic is necesary, but we might find out more friendly way to specify packages by users.
However, as a minimal feature, this is ok if we could instruct users that they couldn't make a mistake to miss required packages in the objective function.
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 agree, but I think Kubeflow Pipelines follows the same way: https://www.kubeflow.org/docs/components/pipelines/sdk/python-function-components/#building-python-function-based-components
@zijianjoy Do you know if Pipelines SDK verifies that all function imports are defined properly in Python Lightweight component?
@anencore94 Any ideas how to verify this?
cc @tenzen-y @gaocegege @johnugeorge
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.
We may need to automatically validating this after this PR. How about making an issue for tracking this feature now ?
If we could make an idea for this validation in general, we may apply this for other kf components like pipelines and training-operators and so on.
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.
Sure, that sound good @anencore94.