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

Update to ODK 1.5.4 #8488

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update to ODK 1.5.4 #8488

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

twhetzel
Copy link
Collaborator

@twhetzel twhetzel commented Dec 11, 2024

ROBOT and SSSOM-Java versions are updated in ODK 1.5.4. Full https://github.com/INCATools/ontology-development-kit/releases/tag/v1.5.4 for ODK 1.5.4.

While the process for updating also typically includes a mock release to ensure no surprises when the release is run, if there is not time to update before the release in January this PR can wait until after the January release. Given the libraries updated, I do not expect issues with this update.

ROBOT and SSSOM-Java versions are updated in ODK 1.5.4. Full https://github.com/INCATools/ontology-development-kit/releases/tag/v1.5.4 for ODK 1.5.4.
@sabrinatoro
Copy link
Collaborator

I ran a mock-release on this branch, and the release failed. (note that the mock release did not fail on master)
(@twhetzel @matentzn)

Here the error log:

runoak -i simpleobo:tmp/mondo-released.obo diff -X simpleobo:mondo-base.obo -o reports/difference_release_base.yaml --output-type yaml
runoak -i simpleobo:tmp/mondo-released.obo diff -X simpleobo:mondo-base.obo
-o reports/difference_release_base.tsv --output-type csv --statistics --group-by-property oio:hasOBONamespace
TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not iterable
make: *** [mondo.Makefile:966: reports/difference_release_base.tsv] Error 1
rm imports/foodon_terms.txt imports/omo_terms.txt imports/ncbigene_terms.txt imports/envo_terms.txt imports/ncit_terms.txt

@twhetzel
Copy link
Collaborator Author

twhetzel commented Jan 4, 2025

Thanks for testing this Sabrina! Which command in the release process (https://mondo.readthedocs.io/en/latest/developer-guide/release/) resulted in the error? And when you say "note that the mock release did not fail on master", did you also create a new feature branch from the current master and include this update and run a mock release?

@matentzn
Copy link
Member

matentzn commented Jan 5, 2025

sh run.sh make reports/difference_release_base.tsv IMP=false MIR=false PAT=false

I can confirm this fails with the above error, which means there is a problem in OAK..

@twhetzel
Copy link
Collaborator Author

twhetzel commented Jan 5, 2025

Ok, @matentzn are you taking it from here then?

@matentzn
Copy link
Member

matentzn commented Jan 5, 2025

It will be blocked for long - I am too backed up on other issues. I am not an OAK developer, so you can just share a reproducible error on the OAK issue tracker and send a PM to Chris and ask who might be able to take care of it; unfortunately our go-to person for this task is not longer with us (Harshad :( )

@twhetzel
Copy link
Collaborator Author

twhetzel commented Jan 9, 2025

I ran sh run.sh make reports/difference_release_base.tsv IMP=false MIR=false PAT=false from this PR branch and did not get an error.

@matentzn
Copy link
Member

matentzn commented Jan 9, 2025

Maybe add a -B?

@twhetzel
Copy link
Collaborator Author

twhetzel commented Jan 9, 2025

I tried sh run.sh make reports/difference_release_base.tsv IMP=false MIR=false PAT=false -B and still did not get an error.
The file is created:

$ ls reports/difference_release_base.tsv 
-rw-r--r--  1 twhetzel  staff  296 Jan  9 07:30 reports/difference_release_base.tsv

@twhetzel
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Can someone re-try the command and see if the error still happens?

@twhetzel twhetzel assigned sabrinatoro and unassigned twhetzel Jan 10, 2025
@matentzn matentzn self-requested a review as a code owner January 10, 2025 19:18
@matentzn
Copy link
Member

here i broke it again so you can replicate the error:

34c42ee

be careful not to merge this commit to master. it passed now because the latest release did not touch the problematic parts of the diff.

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.

3 participants