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

Updated test data #37

Open
wants to merge 40 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Updated test data #37

wants to merge 40 commits into from

Conversation

MansMeg
Copy link
Contributor

@MansMeg MansMeg commented Jan 24, 2025

I have now added test data for MPS during the one chamber period. Solving one task in:
#15

@MansMeg MansMeg requested a review from BobBorges January 24, 2025 18:14
Copy link
Contributor

@BobBorges BobBorges Jan 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would make a couple changes:

  • unquote all the columns
  • kick the "region" column
  • use the swerik party id instead of / in addition to the party column
  • if we keep a string name column, it should probably be the same name that appears in party.csv

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you make these changes so you get it as you want it. I think its good to keep the party names for readability.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm leaving the name as is for now. We will check it later with the historical name test via the ID.

Copy link
Contributor

@BobBorges BobBorges Jan 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think we should leave stray bibtex entries floating around. Under the westac structure, I implemented a bibtex-based referencing system for the project -- the bibtex keys are used in our metadata, but I think the actual reference list is either lost or it's in such an obscure subdir that I can't find it (also bad).

Suggestion

  • Bob re-implements the swerik bibtex db, either as a separate repo, or as a subdirectory of the-swedish-parliament-corpus repo
  • refer to this source by key and link to the bibtex database entry

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes. Very good idea!

@MansMeg
Copy link
Contributor Author

MansMeg commented Feb 3, 2025

Do you fix the conflict?

@BobBorges
Copy link
Contributor

yes, but one of the tests is failing... doing that first.

@BobBorges
Copy link
Contributor

Checking mandates against the records fails because of work going on in that repo. I think we should merge this anyway.

@MansMeg
Copy link
Contributor Author

MansMeg commented Feb 3, 2025

Ok. I dont think that should happen? Dont we test agains main?

@BobBorges
Copy link
Contributor

We were testing against the latest release. I changed it to dev because we're working on that issue, but it's still failing.

@BobBorges
Copy link
Contributor

I think maybe this failing test should be run in the records repo, not here -- the fail has nothing to do with the persons repo data, it's all in the records.

@MansMeg
Copy link
Contributor Author

MansMeg commented Feb 3, 2025

Then I would remove the test from this repo and add the test in an issue in the records repo so we don't loose it. i would also point to this PR.

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.

2 participants