Skip to content

Conversation

@SavvasMel
Copy link
Contributor

Description

It seems that the integration tests for the evaluation are a bit outdated.

Issue Number

Fixes #1647

Is this PR a draft? Mark it as draft.

Checklist before asking for review

  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • My changes comply with basic sanity checks:
    • I have fixed formatting issues with ./scripts/actions.sh lint
    • I have run unit tests with ./scripts/actions.sh unit-test
    • I have documented my code and I have updated the docstrings.
    • I have added unit tests, if relevant
  • I have tried my changes with data and code:
    • I have run the integration tests with ./scripts/actions.sh integration-test
    • (bigger changes) I have run a full training and I have written in the comment the run_id(s): launch-slurm.py --time 60
    • (bigger changes and experiments) I have shared a hegdedoc in the github issue with all the configurations and runs for this experiments
  • I have informed and aligned with people impacted by my change:
    • for config changes: the MatterMost channels and/or a design doc
    • for changes of dependencies: the MatterMost software development channel

@clessig
Copy link
Collaborator

clessig commented Jan 17, 2026

@SavvasMel : Can you please make sure you adhere to the naming convention for branches.

@clessig clessig merged commit c65d5d1 into ecmwf:develop Jan 17, 2026
5 checks passed
@SavvasMel
Copy link
Contributor Author

@SavvasMel : Can you please make sure you adhere to the naming convention for branches.

Yes, apologies!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Evaluation part of integration test fails

2 participants