Implicit set --compress when specifying --compress-method - #274
Conversation
twiggler
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The logic here correctly catches the edge case where a user supplies a method but forgets the boolean flag.
However, from a UX perspective, if the user explicitly supplies --compress-method, their intent is clearly to compress. Instead of raising a ValueError, would it be cleaner to simply infer args.compress = True if a method is present?
(I approved the pr in case you don't want to pursue this any further)
49f1735 to
9dd1621
Compare
|
Good point, I agree that |
|
@twiggler Anything still needed to get this merged? |
59d3cbf to
e4ebdb5
Compare
@Matthijsy No, looks good. |
e4ebdb5 to
e724c42
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #274 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 43.74% 43.75%
=======================================
Files 26 26
Lines 3630 3632 +2
=======================================
+ Hits 1588 1589 +1
- Misses 2042 2043 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
When specifying
--compress-methodwithout--compressthe first argument is ignored. This PR adds a quick check to see that you always specify--compresswhen you specify a method. There is no need to specify a method when the compression is not happing.