Skip to content

Conversation

@r34ctor
Copy link
Contributor

@r34ctor r34ctor commented Dec 12, 2025

Resolves DOC-1187

  • Description of PR changes above includes a link to an existing GitHub issue
  • PR title is prefixed with one of: [BUGFIX], [FEATURE], [DOCS], [MAINTENANCE], [CONTRIB], [MINORBUMP]
  • Code is linted - run invoke lint (uses ruff format + ruff check)
  • Appropriate tests and docs have been updated

For more information about contributing, visit our community resources.

After you submit your PR, keep the page open and monitor the statuses of the various checks made by our continuous integration process at the bottom of the page. Please fix any issues that come up and reach out on Slack if you need help. Thanks for contributing!

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Dec 12, 2025

Deploy Preview for niobium-lead-7998 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 45953a7
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/niobium-lead-7998/deploys/697d1f7ab75528000837fa79
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-11567.docs.greatexpectations.io
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 12, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 84.14%. Comparing base (8d8970b) to head (45953a7).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop   #11567   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    84.14%   84.14%           
========================================
  Files          465      465           
  Lines        39364    39364           
========================================
  Hits         33124    33124           
  Misses        6240     6240           
Flag Coverage Δ
3.10 72.79% <ø> (ø)
3.10 athena 41.49% <ø> (ø)
3.10 aws_deps 45.87% <ø> (ø)
3.10 big 55.25% <ø> (ø)
3.10 bigquery 50.58% <ø> (ø)
3.10 clickhouse 41.50% <ø> (ø)
3.10 databricks 52.34% <ø> (ø)
3.10 filesystem 64.01% <ø> (ø)
3.10 gx-redshift 50.71% <ø> (ø)
3.10 mssql 50.83% <ø> (ø)
3.10 mysql 51.11% <ø> (ø)
3.10 openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds 59.19% <ø> (ø)
3.10 postgresql 54.64% <ø> (ø)
3.10 snowflake 53.17% <ø> (ø)
3.10 spark 55.32% <ø> (ø)
3.10 spark_connect 46.38% <ø> (ø)
3.10 trino 48.20% <ø> (ø)
3.11 72.79% <ø> (ø)
3.11 athena ?
3.11 aws_deps ?
3.11 big ?
3.11 clickhouse ?
3.11 filesystem ?
3.11 mssql ?
3.11 mysql ?
3.11 openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds ?
3.11 spark_connect ?
3.12 72.80% <ø> (ø)
3.12 athena ?
3.12 aws_deps ?
3.12 big ?
3.12 mssql ?
3.12 mysql ?
3.12 openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds ?
3.13 72.78% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️
3.13 athena 41.49% <ø> (ø)
3.13 aws_deps 45.87% <ø> (ø)
3.13 big 55.25% <ø> (ø)
3.13 bigquery 50.58% <ø> (ø)
3.13 clickhouse 41.50% <ø> (ø)
3.13 databricks 52.35% <ø> (ø)
3.13 filesystem 64.01% <ø> (ø)
3.13 gx-redshift 50.71% <ø> (ø)
3.13 mssql 50.83% <ø> (ø)
3.13 mysql 51.11% <ø> (ø)
3.13 openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds 59.20% <ø> (ø)
3.13 postgresql 54.64% <ø> (ø)
3.13 snowflake 53.17% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
3.13 spark 55.32% <ø> (ø)
3.13 spark_connect 46.38% <ø> (ø)
3.13 trino 48.21% <ø> (ø)
cloud 0.00% <ø> (ø)
docs-basic 58.67% <ø> (ø)
docs-creds-needed 57.64% <ø> (+0.17%) ⬆️
docs-spark 56.77% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@r34ctor r34ctor marked this pull request as ready for review January 20, 2026 22:08
@r34ctor r34ctor requested a review from klavavej January 20, 2026 22:09
Copy link
Contributor

@klavavej klavavej left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for working on this!

I have one note that doesn’t fit in the diff:

  1. The Expectations overview says “Manually grouped into custom Expectation Suites via the GX Cloud API.” with the Expectation Suites link pointing to a Core page. Now that you’re adding instructions for populating Expectation Suites with the Cloud API, I think this link should be updated to point to the new Cloud content

Please note that there are a few places where I’ve left multiple inline comments on a single line to separate feedback where I’ve left a committable suggestion for the line from feedback that is more open ended for how you address it or needs content to be moved around to other lines entirely. We’ve discussed before how the GitHub UI can make these stacked comments easy to overlook so I wanted to give you a heads up about some of the review comments having this structure.


Papertrail:

Here are some issues for following up on this work in the future. TBD who will work these and when but I wanted to connect the dots for now

This page provides instructions for working with Expectations. To learn about Expectation types and options, see the [Expectations overview](/cloud/expectations/expectations_overview.md). To learn about the Expectation changelog at the Data Asset level, visit [Manage Data Assets](/cloud/data_assets/manage_data_assets.md#view-data-asset-history).

## Prerequisites
## Create an Expectation
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are several lingering anchor links to the old add-an-expectation header that need to be updated to point to this new create-an-expectation header

See for example Connect GX Cloud to Databricks SQL where the link to "Add an Expectation" points to https://deploy-preview-11567.docs.greatexpectations.io/docs/cloud/expectations/manage_expectations#add-an-expectation

Note that in this case I think it's fine to leave the link text as is. It's just the anchor in the link destination that needs to be updated

"""
This is an example script for creating an expectation with preset or runtime parameters.

To test, run:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this new code sample file needs to be added to docs/docusaurus/docs/components/examples_under_test.py to be tested as part of CI

This is an example script for creating an expectation with preset or runtime parameters.

To test, run:
pytest --docs-tests -k "doc_example_create_an_expectation" tests/integration/test_script_runner.py
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it looks like this test name is copied from the related Core code sample file. I think this will probably need to be changed to a unique name when you put the new code sample under test in docs/docusaurus/docs/components/examples_under_test.py

In your code, you will find the classes for Expectations in the `expectations` module. Import the module:

```python title="Python"
from great_expectations import expectations as gxe
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this import necessary to include? I don't see the shorthand gxe anywhere else in this PR

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oops, you're right, I was just so used to explicitly importing this module.

@r34ctor r34ctor requested a review from klavavej January 30, 2026 21:24
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