Skip to content

Conversation

@rapids-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot commented Jun 7, 2025

Forward-merge triggered by push to branch-25.05 that creates a PR to keep branch-25.08 up-to-date. If this PR is unable to be immediately merged due to conflicts, it will remain open for the team to manually merge. See forward-merger docs for more info.

<!--

Thank you for contributing to cuOpt :)

Here are some guidelines to help the review process go smoothly.

1. Please write a description in this text box of the changes that are
being
   made.

2. Please ensure that you have written units tests for the changes
made/features
   added.

3. If you are closing an issue please use one of the automatic closing
words as
noted here:
https://help.github.com/articles/closing-issues-using-keywords/

4. If your pull request is not ready for review but you want to make use
of the
continuous integration testing facilities please label it with `[WIP]`.

5. If your pull request is ready to be reviewed without requiring
additional
work on top of it, then remove the `[WIP]` label (if present) and
replace
it with `[REVIEW]`. If assistance is required to complete the
functionality,
for example when the C/C++ code of a feature is complete but Python
bindings
are still required, then add the label `[HELP-REQ]` so that others can
triage
and assist. The additional changes then can be implemented on top of the
same PR. If the assistance is done by members of the rapidsAI team, then
no
additional actions are required by the creator of the original PR for
this,
otherwise the original author of the PR needs to give permission to the
person(s) assisting to commit to their personal fork of the project. If
that
doesn't happen then a new PR based on the code of the original PR can be
opened by the person assisting, which then will be the PR that will be
   merged.

6. Once all work has been done and review has taken place please do not
add
features or make changes out of the scope of those requested by the
reviewer
(doing this just add delays as already reviewed code ends up having to
be
re-reviewed/it is hard to tell what is new etc!). Further, please do not
rebase your branch on main/force push/rewrite history, doing any of
these
   causes the context of any comments made by reviewers to be lost. If
   conflicts occur against main they should be resolved by merging main
   into the branch used for making the pull request.

Many thanks in advance for your cooperation!

-->
`jq` option doesn't work with gh workflow command and needs to be move
to separate command.
@rapids-bot
Copy link
Contributor Author

rapids-bot bot commented Jun 7, 2025

FAILURE - Unable to forward-merge due to an error, manual merge is necessary. Do not use the Resolve conflicts option in this PR, follow these instructions https://docs.rapids.ai/maintainers/forward-merger/

IMPORTANT: When merging this PR, do not use the auto-merger (i.e. the /merge comment). Instead, an admin must manually merge by changing the merging strategy to Create a Merge Commit. Otherwise, history will be lost and the branches become incompatible.

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 7, 2025 19:48
@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot requested a review from vyasr June 7, 2025 19:49
## Description
The `logger.warn()` method is deprecated since Python2.7 and replaced
with `logger.warning()`. It leads to those warnings:
```python
DeprecationWarning: The 'warn' method is deprecated, use 'warning' instead
```
This small PR resolves those warnings. It also fixes a few typos along
the way.

Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Ferdman <[email protected]>
@rgsl888prabhu rgsl888prabhu requested a review from a team as a code owner June 9, 2025 15:59
@rgsl888prabhu rgsl888prabhu requested a review from Iroy30 June 9, 2025 15:59
Updating the constraint bounds based on minimal and maximal activity can
sometimes cause the update constraint lower bounds to be greater than
constraint upper bounds even if the constraint is feasible within
tolerance.

This PR fixes the constraint bounds to the same value if this happens.
@rgsl888prabhu rgsl888prabhu requested a review from a team as a code owner June 9, 2025 17:41
rgsl888prabhu and others added 4 commits June 9, 2025 13:54
<!--

Thank you for contributing to cuOpt :)

Here are some guidelines to help the review process go smoothly.

1. Please write a description in this text box of the changes that are
being
   made.

2. Please ensure that you have written units tests for the changes
made/features
   added.

3. If you are closing an issue please use one of the automatic closing
words as
noted here:
https://help.github.com/articles/closing-issues-using-keywords/

4. If your pull request is not ready for review but you want to make use
of the
continuous integration testing facilities please label it with `[WIP]`.

5. If your pull request is ready to be reviewed without requiring
additional
work on top of it, then remove the `[WIP]` label (if present) and
replace
it with `[REVIEW]`. If assistance is required to complete the
functionality,
for example when the C/C++ code of a feature is complete but Python
bindings
are still required, then add the label `[HELP-REQ]` so that others can
triage
and assist. The additional changes then can be implemented on top of the
same PR. If the assistance is done by members of the rapidsAI team, then
no
additional actions are required by the creator of the original PR for
this,
otherwise the original author of the PR needs to give permission to the
person(s) assisting to commit to their personal fork of the project. If
that
doesn't happen then a new PR based on the code of the original PR can be
opened by the person assisting, which then will be the PR that will be
   merged.

6. Once all work has been done and review has taken place please do not
add
features or make changes out of the scope of those requested by the
reviewer
(doing this just add delays as already reviewed code ends up having to
be
re-reviewed/it is hard to tell what is new etc!). Further, please do not
rebase your branch on main/force push/rewrite history, doing any of
these
   causes the context of any comments made by reviewers to be lost. If
   conflicts occur against main they should be resolved by merging main
   into the branch used for making the pull request.

Many thanks in advance for your cooperation!

-->
This simplifies and update source build instructions.
<!--

Thank you for contributing to cuOpt :)

Here are some guidelines to help the review process go smoothly.

1. Please write a description in this text box of the changes that are
being
   made.

2. Please ensure that you have written units tests for the changes
made/features
   added.

3. If you are closing an issue please use one of the automatic closing
words as
noted here:
https://help.github.com/articles/closing-issues-using-keywords/

4. If your pull request is not ready for review but you want to make use
of the
continuous integration testing facilities please label it with `[WIP]`.

5. If your pull request is ready to be reviewed without requiring
additional
work on top of it, then remove the `[WIP]` label (if present) and
replace
it with `[REVIEW]`. If assistance is required to complete the
functionality,
for example when the C/C++ code of a feature is complete but Python
bindings
are still required, then add the label `[HELP-REQ]` so that others can
triage
and assist. The additional changes then can be implemented on top of the
same PR. If the assistance is done by members of the rapidsAI team, then
no
additional actions are required by the creator of the original PR for
this,
otherwise the original author of the PR needs to give permission to the
person(s) assisting to commit to their personal fork of the project. If
that
doesn't happen then a new PR based on the code of the original PR can be
opened by the person assisting, which then will be the PR that will be
   merged.

6. Once all work has been done and review has taken place please do not
add
features or make changes out of the scope of those requested by the
reviewer
(doing this just add delays as already reviewed code ends up having to
be
re-reviewed/it is hard to tell what is new etc!). Further, please do not
rebase your branch on main/force push/rewrite history, doing any of
these
   causes the context of any comments made by reviewers to be lost. If
   conflicts occur against main they should be resolved by merging main
   into the branch used for making the pull request.

Many thanks in advance for your cooperation!

-->
During the PDLP LP relaxation phase, the solution bound was incorrectly
converted to a user objective value twice, yielding an incorrect sign on
maximizations problems. This only occurs before B&B updates the bound
further, which explains why this bug only occurs in specific scenarios
(short runs, large problems).

This also fixes optimality not being reported on simple maximizations
problems.

closes #76
<!--

Thank you for contributing to cuOpt :)

Here are some guidelines to help the review process go smoothly.

1. Please write a description in this text box of the changes that are
being
   made.

2. Please ensure that you have written units tests for the changes
made/features
   added.

3. If you are closing an issue please use one of the automatic closing
words as
noted here:
https://help.github.com/articles/closing-issues-using-keywords/

4. If your pull request is not ready for review but you want to make use
of the
continuous integration testing facilities please label it with `[WIP]`.

5. If your pull request is ready to be reviewed without requiring
additional
work on top of it, then remove the `[WIP]` label (if present) and
replace
it with `[REVIEW]`. If assistance is required to complete the
functionality,
for example when the C/C++ code of a feature is complete but Python
bindings
are still required, then add the label `[HELP-REQ]` so that others can
triage
and assist. The additional changes then can be implemented on top of the
same PR. If the assistance is done by members of the rapidsAI team, then
no
additional actions are required by the creator of the original PR for
this,
otherwise the original author of the PR needs to give permission to the
person(s) assisting to commit to their personal fork of the project. If
that
doesn't happen then a new PR based on the code of the original PR can be
opened by the person assisting, which then will be the PR that will be
   merged.

6. Once all work has been done and review has taken place please do not
add
features or make changes out of the scope of those requested by the
reviewer
(doing this just add delays as already reviewed code ends up having to
be
re-reviewed/it is hard to tell what is new etc!). Further, please do not
rebase your branch on main/force push/rewrite history, doing any of
these
   causes the context of any comments made by reviewers to be lost. If
   conflicts occur against main they should be resolved by merging main
   into the branch used for making the pull request.

Many thanks in advance for your cooperation!

-->
Minor doc fix to ensure commands to fetch test datasets are instructed
to be run the right working directory.

closes #86
This PR adds a statement regarding the COIN-OR project and the
corresponding URL.
@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 224d694 into branch-25.08 Jun 11, 2025
115 of 119 checks passed
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.

5 participants