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

Handle bad JSONs #190

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 27, 2023
Merged

Handle bad JSONs #190

merged 3 commits into from
Jun 27, 2023

Conversation

tunetheweb
Copy link
Member

  • Change from MapTuple to MapTupleFlat to remove Nones
  • Add defensive coding to add_date_and_client

@tunetheweb tunetheweb requested a review from rviscomi June 27, 2023 16:19
@tunetheweb tunetheweb marked this pull request as draft June 27, 2023 16:20
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Coverage report

Note
No coverage data of the default branch was found for comparison. A possible reason for this is that the coverage action has not yet run after a push event and the data is therefore not yet initialized.

The coverage rate is 42.87%.
The branch rate is 35%.

0% of new lines are covered.

Diff Coverage details (click to unfold)

modules/import_all.py

0% of new lines are covered (13.39% of the complete file).
Missing lines: 457

modules/non_summary_pipeline.py

0% of new lines are covered (23.52% of the complete file).
Missing lines: 438, 440, 441, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451, 452, 459, 460, 461, 462

@tunetheweb tunetheweb marked this pull request as ready for review June 27, 2023 17:54
@tunetheweb tunetheweb merged commit 6fa0bc8 into main Jun 27, 2023
@tunetheweb tunetheweb deleted the handle-bad-jsons branch June 27, 2023 17:54
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.

1 participant