Add code coverage

Codecov Report

:exclamation: No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@ef5922a). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master       #2   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   76.92%
=========================================
  Files             ?        4
  Lines             ?      195
  Branches          ?        0
=========================================
  Hits              ?      150
  Misses            ?       35
  Partials          ?       10


Error occurs at 'Step 0: Data Preparation'

I ran 'gather_data_from_xml.py' than IndexError occurs at line 113.

Could you please help me?
previous thing that I did is just clone the git and installed requirements

Hi,
Do you wish to train a new model or generate improvisations with the pre-trained model?
If you want to train, you should put your own training data in the folders as described in the README.
If you want to generate with the pre-trained model, skip to step 2.
Shunit

Hi,
Do you wish to train a new model or generate improvisations with the pre-trained model?
If you want to train, you should put your own training data in the folders as described in the README.
If you want to generate with the pre-trained model, skip to step 2.
Shunit

Hi I'm getting the same issue when I have supplied my own training data in the folder structure as described in the README. (Essentially it looks like train_songs is empty)
Is there something else I need to specify?? Cheers


#121: Added colors to math buttons palette

@oskarhinc prefix the commit/PR with #

@oskarhinc looks good, note that you still need t add the background styling + plus the grouping of buttons in the screenshot is laid out a bit different.
@johnhbenetech @sueannma I assume that the grouping of buttons in #121 is intentional?

@oskarhinc @pgesek that's correct. grouping should be as in #121. We can discuss on call if we want to break this task down into smaller parts

@pgesek You're right, the background is still to do.
@johnhbenetech Maybe I'll leave you the questions about grouping below #121


Registrator fails on reboot

Running vagrant halt && vagrant up gives the following error -
● registrator.service - Registrator
   Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/registrator.service; enabled; vendor preset: disabled)
   Active: failed (Result: start-limit) since Mon 2016-01-11 11:46:35 GMT; 8min ago

Jan 11 11:46:34 slave1 systemd[1]: registrator.service: Unit entered failed state.
Jan 11 11:46:34 slave1 systemd[1]: registrator.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'.
Jan 11 11:46:35 slave1 systemd[1]: registrator.service: Service hold-off time over, scheduling restart.
Jan 11 11:46:35 slave1 systemd[1]: Stopped Registrator.
Jan 11 11:46:35 slave1 systemd[1]: registrator.service: Start request repeated too quickly.
Jan 11 11:46:35 slave1 systemd[1]: Failed to start Registrator.
Jan 11 11:46:35 slave1 systemd[1]: registrator.service: Unit entered failed state.
Jan 11 11:46:35 slave1 systemd[1]: registrator.service: Failed with result 'start-limit'.```

probably related to https://github.com/Capgemini/Apollo/issues/574

Couple of other services have RestartSec=20 not sure if this might help fix it

Looks related to consul - consul fails on a reboot as well with -
Feb 18 13:32:27 apollo-mesos-master-1 docker[1351]: Error while pulling image: Get https://index.docker.io/v1/repositories/gliderlabs/consul-server/images: dial tcp: lookup index.docker.io: Temporary failure in name resolution

Closing via https://github.com/Capgemini/Apollo/commit/f9660d371ea1ee193f605b6908703a28747d5e00


[Doc Issue][Sample Hello World app does not appear in sideloaded list][2501097]

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
91
30
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 7aa5ea4:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
91
30
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 3a0dfb2:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
91
30
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 3b72feb:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
91
30
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 844df37:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
91
29
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit d54a5af:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Docs Build status updates of commit d7b99a5:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit e72073b:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 2f2e1c3:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 4982e5f:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit c6231c3:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml

link
:warning:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 6740796:
:x: Validation status: errors
Please follow instructions here which may help to resolve issue.

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:x:Error

Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml

Line 635, Column 1: [Error: yaml-syntax-error] While parsing a block mapping, did not find expected key.

For more details, please refer to the build report.
If you see build warnings/errors with permission issues, it might be due to single sign-on (SSO) enabled on Microsoft's GitHub organizations. Please follow instructions here to re-authorize your GitHub account to Docs Build.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
Note: Your PR may contain errors or warnings unrelated to the files you changed. This happens when external dependencies like GitHub alias, Microsoft alias, cross repo links are updated. Please use these instructions to resolve them.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml

link
:warning:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 04ef6ce:
:x: Validation status: errors
Please follow instructions here which may help to resolve issue.

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:x:Error

Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml

Line 635, Column 1: [Error: yaml-syntax-error] While parsing a block mapping, did not find expected key.

For more details, please refer to the build report.
If you see build warnings/errors with permission issues, it might be due to single sign-on (SSO) enabled on Microsoft's GitHub organizations. Please follow instructions here to re-authorize your GitHub account to Docs Build.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
Note: Your PR may contain errors or warnings unrelated to the files you changed. This happens when external dependencies like GitHub alias, Microsoft alias, cross repo links are updated. Please use these instructions to resolve them.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit ea04fc5:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit d0d83c8:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

please include developer portal app in teams/teams store due to an api limitation.

changes are made as per the suggestion

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit 1281dab:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Or teams store is not needed. It is not available as an app on Teams.

The changes are implemented.

Docs Build status updates of commit e459074:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel

Acrolinx Scorecards
We currently enforce a minimum score of 80.
Click the scorecard links for each article to review the Acrolinx feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, writing style, and terminology:

Article
Score
Issues
Scorecard
Processed

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
94
22
link
:white_check_mark:

More info about Acrolinx
Use the Acrolinx extension, or sidebar, in Visual Studio Code to check spelling, grammar, style, tone, clarity, and key terminology when you're creating or updating content. For more information, see Use the Visual Studio Code extension to run Acrolinx locally.

Docs Build status updates of commit dd0761c:
:white_check_mark: Validation status: passed

File
Status
Preview URL
Details

msteams-platform/sbs-gs-nodejs.yml
:white_check_mark:Succeeded
View

For more details, please refer to the build report.
Note: Broken links written as relative paths are included in the above build report. For broken links written as absolute paths or external URLs, see the broken link report.
For any questions, please:Try searching the docs.microsoft.com contributor guidesPost your question in the Docs support channel


Fix rpak aliasing not working when trying to alias towards a vanilla rpak

Fixing stuff described by @Alystrasz on discord. I don't really like this behaviour as it behaves a bit differently for vanilla rpak loads and modded rpak loads, but aliasing is hacky already so meh.

cc @Alystrasz for testing

Explanation from Spoon on Discord:

it only worked before because of two bugs in the old system
which meant that when you aliased an rpak, the game would look in the vanilla folder for it first instead of the modded one, but then when it tried to load the vanilla one, it loaded the modded one as well
new system only looks in the modded folder for the alias, so for s2s where it is trying to alias a non-existent rpak to a vanilla rpak that behaviour is broken

cc @ASpoonPlaysGames to decide whether to merge with or without comment

Dont think it's necessary, it acts fairly intuitively

ah fuck, forgot to prefix commit with core:. Sorry @F1F7Y :c


Pagination bar not responsive friendly and disappeared in horizontal scroll

Describe the bug
The pagination bar is not sticky and adjust to screen width when added more column added /  screen size change and horizontal scroll shown.

needed to do horizontal scroll  to the end of the table

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

Zoom out the screen/ add more column to datatable to make it horizontal scroll

Expected behavior
A clear and concise description of what you expected to happen.
Should be like this, the pagination bar is not effect by the screen size and column count

The pagination footer is responsive in the sense that it wraps on screens wider than xs.
Look at both these examples:

Pagination
Complex usage

Resize the window or use a mobile phone and you should see something like this:

Perhaps you can share a working example reproducing your specific use-case? (i.e. codesandbox)

when more column are added you will see the bug
in mobile need to horizontal scroll to see pagination controls

in desktop view

I warped the datatable in Mantine ScrollArea for horizontal scrolling when more columns are added

Ah, I suspected that much.
Never wrap the DataTable in a ScrollArea.
It's completely unnecessary and can lead to unexpected results (as you see), because the DataTable has its own internal ScrollArea and it's horizontally-scrollable by default, as you can see in the docs website example pages.

@icflorescu How do I turn on horizontal scrolling?

@StringKe See the docs here: https://icflorescu.github.io/mantine-datatable/examples/scrollable-vs-auto-height

The DataTable will always be “horizontally-scrollable” if its width it greater than its container width.

You don't have to do anything specifically to turn on horizontal scrolling.


Website: Add direct links to samples

Both Java and Go clients are missing links to samples.
May be put them on the top right together with Docs and Source.

Added them to https://cadenceworkflow.io/docs/03_goclient/ and https://cadenceworkflow.io/docs/04_javaclient/ since there would otherwise be too many links on the top right.


feat: add file(1) as the file fallback previewer

An implementation of the feature request: https://github.com/sxyazi/yazi/issues/51#issuecomment-1780952363 by @magnetophon

Thanks, works great!


[Infrastructure] Set up Azure blob storage buckets and credentials

For #1550, we'd need an Azure blob storage bucket that we can write to with a short-lived retention policy, e.g., 1 day.
Ideally, we'd also have an Azure bucket with a long-lived retention policy to store small-ish cache files.

@ntabris: Would it be quick for you to get buckets and the retention policy set up? Otherwise I'll figure out how to do this.

Completed. Thanks, @ntabris, for giving me a tour of Azure and explaining to me what I needed to know to get this done.


update header format

Update header file format to use /* */ instead of /** */ as the former should be used for the file header format, and the later should be used for javadoc.

Codecov Report

Merging #26 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #26   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage    46.5%   46.5%
======================================
  Files         162     162
  Lines        5991    5991
  Branches     1006    1006
======================================
  Hits         2786    2786
  Misses       2783    2783
  Partials      422     422

Impacted Files
Coverage Δ

...internal/routing/InMemoryCollectionRoutingMap.java
85.71% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...a/com/microsoft/azure/cosmosdb/ConnectionMode.java
100% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

.../rx/internal/PartitionKeyRangeGoneRetryPolicy.java
35.71% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...ava/com/microsoft/azure/cosmosdb/SqlQuerySpec.java
68% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...in/java/com/microsoft/azure/cosmosdb/Document.java
27.27% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...a/com/microsoft/azure/cosmosdb/PermissionMode.java
85.71% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...zure/cosmosdb/rx/internal/RxGatewayStoreModel.java
80% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...ava/com/microsoft/azure/cosmosdb/RetryOptions.java
42.85% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...rnal/query/ProxyDocumentQueryExecutionContext.java
85.71% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

...ain/java/com/microsoft/azure/cosmosdb/OfferV2.java
0% <ø> (ø)
:arrow_up:

... and 150 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update fa0ea34...8e78f50. Read the comment docs.


Added "Properties" property on Logger for reading and editing properties.

Logger - Properties added using WithProperty can now be inspected safely
Alternative implementation of #3424 to fix #3422
Also resolves partly #2960 (Still doesn't resolve use of SimpleLayout that are not threadsafe). And there will now be a performance-hit if very aggressive about modifying NLog-variables, and have many of them.

Codecov Report

Merging #3430 into release/4.6.4 will decrease coverage by <1%.
The diff coverage is 70%.

@@              Coverage Diff               @@
##           release/4.6.4   #3430    +/-   ##
==============================================
- Coverage             80%     80%   -<1%
==============================================
  Files                358     359     +1
  Lines              28516   28639   +123
  Branches            3814    3819     +5
==============================================
+ Hits               22831   22928    +97
- Misses              4589    4609    +20
- Partials            1096    1102     +6

@304NotModified when sharing the same loggers accross multiple classes.

This doesn't make sense. Should say locations instead of classes

I'm not used to receive commits as feedback on my tasks. Prefer comments on the overall idea or comments on the individual code lines.
Sent from my Sony Xperia
---- Julian Verdurmen wrote ----
@304NotModified commented on this pull request.

In src/NLog/Logger.cshttps://github.com/NLog/NLog/pull/3430#discussion_r287606922:

@@ -123,21 +133,20 @@ public Logger WithProperty(string propertyKey, object propertyValue)
///
/// Property Name
/// Property Value

   [Obsolete("Instead use the Properties-property to access or modify the active collection")]

I'm a bit confused. Working in one (feature) branch with multiple people works flawless. Why can't we push another commit here? It works very well and especially when pulled rebase is set on both sides (git config --global pull.rebase true)
With my commits I'm trying to help here - not obstructing commiting ;)
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/NLog/NLog/pull/3430?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACXZ7HFK6RGF3OOPL3TYGX3PXLAJZA5CNFSM4HPVDNR2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWFIHK3DMKJSXC5LFON2FEZLWNFSXPKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOBZWVYOQ#discussion_r287606922, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACXZ7HGQBWCYOM6JULZVNE3PXLAJZANCNFSM4HPVDNRQ.

@304NotModified Guess this is the last bullet before NLog 4.6.5? Think it would be great to have #3414 resolved :)

@304NotModified Guess this is the last bullet before NLog 4.6.5? Think it would be great to have #3414 resolved :)

Yes indeed :)

Yes you are right. Been seeing 4.6.4tel:4.6.4 so long time that I have started thinking it as released :)
Sent from my Sony Xperia
---- Julian Verdurmen wrote ----
@304NotModifiedhttps://github.com/304NotModified Guess this is the last bullet before NLog 4.6.5? Think it would be great to have #3414https://github.com/NLog/NLog/issues/3414 resolved :)
Yes indeed :)
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/NLog/NLog/pull/3430?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACXZ7HCT4H3MOFHHOHZIBLDPXTDV5A5CNFSM4HPVDNR2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWLB47I#issuecomment-496377469, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACXZ7HFYQCEDB4K5CRRSY4DPXTDV5ANCNFSM4HPVDNRQ.

Remember to add this PR to the 4.6.4tel:4.6.4 milestone-version.
Sent from my Sony Xperia
---- Julian Verdurmen wrote ----
@304NotModifiedhttps://github.com/304NotModified Guess this is the last bullet before NLog 4.6.5? Think it would be great to have #3414https://github.com/NLog/NLog/issues/3414 resolved :)
Yes indeed :)
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/NLog/NLog/pull/3430?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACXZ7HCT4H3MOFHHOHZIBLDPXTDV5A5CNFSM4HPVDNR2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWLB47I#issuecomment-496377469, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACXZ7HFYQCEDB4K5CRRSY4DPXTDV5ANCNFSM4HPVDNRQ.

thanks, it's anyway in the changelog.
offtopic: What is <tel:4.6.4> ? ;)

offtopic: What is tel:4.6.4 ? ;)

When I reply to Github-issues from the Email-program on my phone, then strange things happens.

LOL


connect terminal-popup kcr fzf buffers doesn't work

A few example in kcr tldr use the command connect terminal-popup which doesn't work for me ( no such command ) I have to use connect-terminal instead

Yes this isnt merged upstream but there is some scripts you could add to your kakoune configs:
# windowing/tmux.kak

…
define-command tmux-terminal-popup -params 1.. -shell-completion -docstring '
tmux-terminal-popup <program> [<arguments>]: create a new terminal as a tmux popup
The program passed as argument will be executed in the new popup' \
%{
    tmux-terminal-impl 'display-popup -E -h 75% -d #{pane_current_path}' %arg{@}
}
…
alias global terminal-popup tmux-terminal-popup
…

The connect command is not required in alacritty.kak and tmux.kak.
I think to remove the connect command—the terminal commands should let know they run from Kakoune.
I’m not sure about the correct environment variable names to export: KAKOUNE_SESSION and KAKOUNE_CLIENT—which come from kak_session and kak_client—might be too generic.
When the terminal spawns, it has these two environment variables set.
KAKOUNE_CLIENT feels off, as it doesn’t represent the client.
A more correct name could be KAKOUNE_OPENER_CLIENT—like Chrome with openerTabId.
We can also not export the client information and infer the client to connect to.


The logger not working with Cash penalty environment

The logger for the Cash penalty is not working in the current version. The logger was supposed to log cash percentage, returns etc. but it is not working. Also, the error data from Stable baselines is not getting logged.
Probably the error is in env_stocktrading_cashpenalty where
from stable_baselines3.common import logger --> from stable_baselines3.common.logger import Logger as per stable baselines format.
Also, we would three sets of lines in the get_model function in the models.py folder for stable baselines 3.
`
tmp_path =  "tmp{}_log".format(
model_name)
logger = configure(tmp_path, ["csv","tensorboard"])
model.set_logger(logger)
`
Am I getting anything wrong, or is it fixed?

Hi,
I think the logger is updated in stable_baselines3
from stable_baselines3.common import logger
to
from stable_baselines3.common import utils
then configure the logger using
logger = utils.configure_logger(......)
and use the logger as normal

Yes, after updating stable_baseline3 it is working. A few more things to add
self.logger = utils.configure_logger('tensorboard_log','environment')
and convert all the logger to self.logger


Update binding, delete redundant file

This is going to be obsolete with virtual-modules, not even worth rebasing tbh


models register doesn't work

I tried to register model, I was able to do it via curl but the python sdk doesn't work
client.models.register(
    model={
        "identifier": "Llama3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct",
        "llama_model": "Llama3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct",
        "provider_id": "meta-reference-0",
        "metadata": {}
    }
)

Curl command (that worked):
curl -X POST http://localhost:5000/models/register   -H "Content-Type: application/json"   -d '{
    "model_id": "Llama3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct",
    "provider_model_id": null,
    "provider_id": "meta-reference-0",
    "metadata": null
  }'

Error:
BadRequestError: Error code: 400 - {'error': {'detail': {'errors': [{'loc': ['body', 'model_id'], 'msg': 'Field required', 'type': 'missing'}]}}}

Thanks, SDK to reflect the latest registration was just updated in https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-stack-client-python/pull/20

Resolved. See example register in https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-stack-client-python/blob/30936d174bf31e98b42207ac5930baff2e4fedb2/src/llama_stack_client/lib/cli/models/models.py#L82-L89


Allow to define weave image names through env variables

Fixes hardcoded weave image names in agent (other images are already taken from env).

Looking good!


Introduce an object with combined state

This PR is purely a refactoring and despite the rather large diff, it introduces no changes to the current functionalities, other than the order of some operations when the node is started.
There are 2 main changes:

rename Status to RawStatus and State to Status: both of these objects refer to the same thing, so their names should match as well; also, this allows the new combined state object to be named State
introduce a State object: the current node structure involves a few actor-like objects that communicate with one another; this is fine, but the state of the actors overlaps, can't really be fully isolated, and adds plenty of extra complexity; this change proposes a combined State object shared between the main actors, allowing the communication between them to be much simpler, while not changing the way their channels are utilized or the scopes of their functionalities; this setup reduces code complexity and will enable further improvements to the overall structure

Overall, this structure is the way to go. Need to ensure the visibility does not leak, I've had some bad experiences with node halts when these methods are misused during future modifications

Rebased and applied some of the review suggestions related to APIs (some of the pubs seem to have been left over from an intermediate step of the refactoring).

Have we been able to burn-in test this PR?

TEST TEST TEST
Snarkos on $devnet-ue2c-arm-a1e568c376e78b13956d66e24f4b4c84 has been recompiled and docker containers have been rebuilt.
IP: $<IP_ADDRESS>
LOGS: $https://app.datadoghq.com/logs/livetail?query=pr%3A1727%20Report&cols=host%2Ccontainer_name

Snarkos on devnet-ue2c-arm-a1e568c376e78b13956d66e24f4b4c84 has been recompiled and docker containers have been rebuilt.
IP: <IP_ADDRESS>
LOGS: https://app.datadoghq.com/logs/livetail?query=pr%3A1727 Report&cols=host%2Ccontainer_name

Snarkos on devnet-ue2c-arm-a1e568c376e78b13956d66e24f4b4c84 has been recompiled and docker containers have been rebuilt.
LOGS: https://app.datadoghq.com/logs/livetail?query=pr%3A1727 Report&cols=host%2Ccontainer_name

Snarkos on devnet-ue2c-arm-a1e568c376e78b13956d66e24f4b4c84 has been recompiled and docker containers have been rebuilt.
LOGS: https://app.datadoghq.com/logs/livetail?query=pr%3A1727 Report&cols=host%2Ccontainer_name

Have we been able to burn-in test this PR?

Yes, it has been running on an airtight devnet since last Thursday.


implement nullable prompt

I implemented a solution to use TextPrompt with nullable types.
I created new interface INullablePrompt.
I was forced to change type of Validator in TextPrompt.
Example:
decimal? nullableDecimal = await new TextPrompt<decimal?>("Value?")
    .AllowEmpty()
    .ShowNullableAsync( _ansiConsole, CancellationToken.None );

@nils-a It's my proposition to fix #714.

 Thank you for your submission, we really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.:x: danielklecha sign nowYou have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

@nils-a @patriksvensson Could you review my changes? Is it a desirable modification?

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree


Run Actions

As an ZITADEL developer I want to be able to use the same code part for executing actions in different places, so I can run it wherever I need.
Acceptance Criteria

[ ] We are able to execute actions

Proper issues have been created so this one will be closed.
https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/issues/7235


Added function to rename items

Max char limit seems to be 21 and not 20 like in the client

FYI you opened the pull request against your own repository, not against the upstream one.
When you open the pull request again, could you also check the indentation? I see both tabs and spaces; should be tabs everywhere. Thanks!


Question: What is the best way to set up a development environment?

Hey,
first of all: thank you for this nice project!
Can you give me a hint how to set up this project with all the necessery extensions?

I'm currently using homestead locally. You can read more about it here as well as setting it up.


Move custom inflections from /config/initializers folder to application.rb

Custom inflections (which override Rails naming conventions) loading as initializer from /config/initializers/inflections.rb after initializer in config/application.rb executed.
Attempt to load MiqRegion class from initializer defined in config/application.rb will throw Exception:
Uncaught exception: undefined method `vm_or_template_ids' for class `MiqRegion' 	/Users/yrudman/work/rh/manageiq/app/models/miq_region.rb:29:in `alias_method' 	/Users/yrudman/work/rh/manageiq/app/models/miq_region.rb:29:in `<class:MiqRegion>'    on    alias_method :all_vm_or_template_ids, :vm_or_template_ids  since inflections is not loaded yet.  Loading inflections first  will resolve it.
Changes:

created initializer in config/application.rb to load all inflections and be executed before Vmdb::Settings initialized
deleted file config/initializers/inflections

@miq-bot add-label core
/cc @Fryguy @kbrock

👍 LGTM will wait for @Fryguy or @kbrock review before merging


Controlled vocabulary for the occurrenceStatus property

The term occurrenceStatus is undergoing revision in #339 (Note: term also mentioned in #238 but that issue is not directly related to this one). As part of that revision, we should officially create the controlled vocabulary that goes with the term since it is very straightforward and the CV would have only two terms. The design pattern will follow that used in the existing Darwin Core controlled vocabularies.
The controlled vocabulary would consist of the following two terms, which use as controlled value terms the strings currently listed at https://rs.gbif.org/core/dwc_occurrence_2020-07-15.xml and as examples in the current term metadata: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/occurrenceStatus:
English language label: present
controlled value string: present
definition: a Taxon is present at a Location
English language label: absent
controlled value string: absent
definition: a Taxon is absent at a Location
When the terms are generated, they will be assigned IRIs according to the existing design patterns for controlled vocabularies in Darwin Core. The list of terms page for the controlled vocabulary will contain instructions that the controlled value strings MUST be used as values for dwc:occurrenceStatus and that term IRIs MUST be used as values for dwciri:occurrenceStatus.

Might it be better to be more explicit in the definitions, something like 'an Organism was present at the designated place and time', to avoid the misconception that the term can be applied to a Taxon?

Or more in keeping with the proposed term definition, 'an Organism was present within the bounded place and time'.

For me, there are at least two terms missing that were in the previous GBIF Occurrence Status Vocabulary:

doubtful: "The taxon is scored as being present in the area but there is some doubt over the evidence. The doubt may be of different kinds including taxonomic or geographic imprecision in the records."
Used for:

literature reports that do not cite specimens or cite specimens that cannot be located, when there is no other evidence that the taxon occurs in the given area (and when it is also not easily referable to something else)
herbarium specimens from a given area, where there is no other evidence the taxon occurs in that area and hence there is a suspicion that the specimen might have been mislabeled
dots on distribution maps (in our case these are based on occurrence records in ALA) that are far outside the known distribution of a taxon and which we assume are the result of misidentification, when we do not have direct access to the specimen; this is just an annotation; as soon as the identification has been verified or changed, it can go (or stay with the old identification).

excluded: "Subclass of absent: The organism is reported in some (gray) literature for a certain region, but is is erroneous. Reason for exclusion could be a misidentification, an old report, a simple publishing mistake or any other or unknown reason."

Used when the specimens in the report have been re-identified to something else, or when one is reasonably confident they are referrable to something else.

I do not feel as strongly about this one.

I would also like to make a case for extinct, which the (old) GBIF vocabulary had as a synonym of absent. extinct is secondarily absent: the taxon has been present in the area once. extinct is also in threat status, but there it cannot be used with introduced occurrences.

doubtful...literature reports that do not cite specimens or cite specimens that cannot be located

I would not automatically brand unvouchered reports of occurrences as "doubtful".  I would guess that in the vast majority of cases, they represent legitimate occurrence instances of organisms that the reporters would have identified as the indicated taxon.  I think there may need to be some other indication that there is no explicit evidence (specimen, image, etc.), which doesn't explicitly cast doubt on the Occurrence, but captures the apparent absence of evidence.  Perhaps something like "unvouchered" or "unverified"?  If I had to choose between "present" and "doubtful" for voucher-less published occurrence reports, I would choose "present".

I would also like to make a case for extinct, which the (old) GBIF vocabulary had as a synonym of absent. extinct is secondarily absent: the taxon has been present in the area once. extinct is also in threat status, but there it cannot be used with introduced occurrences.

I would reserve the word extinct to mean "from planet Earth".  For our systems, we use the term extirpated to indicate that a taxon once occurred in an area (naturally or introduced) and has since been eliminated from that area (but not entirely from planet Earth).
Having said that, I'm queasy about framing instances of "Taxon-at-Location" as Occurrence instances.  I would rather see instances of Occurrence be more strictly defined as "Organism-at-Event".  I think we will ultimately need a new class to represent properties of instances of "Taxon-at-Location"; although I realize that people also use Occurrence for this purpose (a practice that is encouraged by terms such as establishmentMeans, degreeOfEstablishment, pathway, and occurrenceStatus being organized within the Occurrence class).
I don't think we're ready for this leap just yet, but perhaps next year we can think about a new class along the lines of TaxonLocation within which we can organize these (and other -- e.g., threatStatus?) terms.

I would not automatically brand unvouchered reports of occurrences as "doubtful".

My bad. Me neither. The occurrence status for these reports themselves would be present. I was (or meant to be) talking about statements in literature that specifically say the occurrence of a taxon in a given area is doubtful. I see now that I totally did not make that clear. These doubtful statements are probably not equally common in all taxonomic groups, but they are quite common in the taxonomic group I work on (bryophytes). There is quite a bit of sleuthing involved in making these statements; not just a data entry job.

I would reserve the word extinct to mean "from planet Earth". For our systems, we use the term extirpated to indicate that a taxon once occurred in an area (naturally or introduced) and has since been eliminated from that area (but not entirely from planet Earth).

I am fine with extirpated instead of extinct.

Having said that, I'm queasy about framing instances of "Taxon-at-Location" as Occurrence instances. I would rather see instances of Occurrence be more strictly defined as "Organism-at-Event". I think we will ultimately need a new class to represent properties of instances of "Taxon-at-Location"; although I realize that people also use Occurrence for this purpose (a practice that is encouraged by terms such as establishmentMeans, degreeOfEstablishment, pathway, and occurrenceStatus being organized within the Occurrence class).

I would like that too, to separate the primary occurrence data from the derived data. We would still use the same terms (occurrenceStatus etc.) though, as is in done the GBIF Species Distribution Extension.

So... having thought about it a bit more, I think an alternate (and perhaps superior) approach to the "Taxon-at-Location" issue is to keep it as Occurrence (i.e., Organinsm-at-Event), but expand the potential scope of Organism to include something like "population".  When that class was being discussed, we talked about how far up the aggregate scale was best to go.  Clearly it needed to go beyond "single organism" both to accommodate colonial things (corals, and/bee colonies, etc.), and also "packs"/"pods" (e.g., wolves, whales).  However, although we did discuss extending out as far as "Populations", people got queasy about that (myself included) because at some point a "population" blends into a Taxon.
However, after having worked with this more directly (especially for the Plants of Hawaii project), I am increasingly seeing the value of using "population" as an allowable scope for Organism, so long as it remains taxonomically homogeneous.  basically, it's a way of recognizing aggregate sets of Organisms starting at "one" and increasing all the way up to (and including) the most granular flavor of "Taxon".  This is both logically consistent, and allows us to represent "Taxon-at-Location" instances as Occurrences, with the Organism part being some unit of population, and the Event part capturing both space and time properties.
More thought required.

@deepreef, I share your (and other people's) uneasiness, but I think the definition of Organism is already there:

Organism
A particular organism or defined group of organisms considered to be taxonomically homogeneous.

Taxon
A group of organisms (sensu http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/OBI_0100026) considered by taxonomists to form a homogeneous unit

Thanks @nielsklazenga :

but I think the definition of Organism is already there:

Yes., and that definition was crafted that way to leave the door open for including "populations" (which can certainly fall within the realm of a "defined group of organisms considered to be taxonomically homogeneous").
So... the definition does not need to change -- just the Comments (expand the parenthetical to "(such as packs, clones, and colonies, and populations)"), and the Examples needs another sentence, "A defined population of organisms belonging to the same taxon."

I do not think there is a danger of an Organism ever becoming a Taxon.

I agree.  That was one of the reasons the original scope stopped short of explicitly including populations; but I think that is the lesser concern than the fact that DwC currently has no other way to represent a "population" -- but clearly that is a unit of biological instance many of us would like to assign properties to, and subsequently share.  If we allow the extent of a population to reach (but not exceed) "every organism on earth belonging to a specified Taxon", then that becomes a fairly clear demarcation between where an Organism ends, and a Taxon begins.

doubtful is a property that also came up for biologging data. E.g. an outlier occurrence on a track. But I think it's better to leave the occurrenceStatus vocab to present and absent and handle outliers another way (e.g. remove them, give them a high coordinateUncertaintyInMeters, ...). Ping @tdwg/biologging

I agree that this use case is not a use case for occurrenceStatus:doubtful, but rather for a high coordinateUncertaintyInMeters, but that does not mean that there are no valid use cases for occurrenceStatus:doubtful. coordinateUncertaintyInMeters only makes sense if there is a georeference, which is not always the case. Also, in almost every case where I would want to use doubtful, it is the Identification of the organism that is in question, not its Location, so enlarging the area (by giving a higher coordinateUncertaintyInMeters) is not going to make the occurrenceStatus any less doubtful.
doubtful is in a vocabulary that has been used for occurrenceStatus for a long time, so you cannot really talk about "leaving" the vocab to present and absent, as that is a change of current practice. If there is going to be a normative vocabulary on occurrenceStatus, it needs to include all the terms that are needed to get a reasonably nuanced representation in all use cases of occurrenceStatus. Unless these terms do not belong to occurrenceStatus and are better accommodated some place else, but I have heard nobody make that argument for doubtful (or excluded, or extirpated).

From the machine observation side, I am not too familiar with use cases in Darwin Core but would be hesitant to use coordinateUncertaintyInMeters and assume a consistent result: Different sensors have different ways of reporting the quality of location estimates, and it is common for there to be no quality estimate at all, and for very large outliers to be identified by the sensor as being a good quality location. How would this differentiate location uncertainty provided by a sensor vs through some later processing method.
Probably, 'outliers' would be ideally removed prior to putting into Darwin Core. But keep in mind what a user will define as an outlier will depend on context, commonly something like, "is a location an outlier that is in the right area but probably 1-5 km off?", which depends on the scale of the analysis they are thinking about.

So...  the distinction here is about what, exactly, is "doubtful".  If we accept that an instance of Occurrence represents the intersection of an Organism and an Event, then the most proximal interpretation of an occurrenceStatus value of "doubtful" would be "it is doubtful that this Organism occurred at this Event".
Simply increasing the value coordinateUncertaintyInMeters only addresses one aspect of the potential doubt:  the "where" part.  In other words, a secondary property of the relevant Event is Location, so assigning a large value for coordinateUncertaintyInMeters for that associated Location suggests that the Organism did exist, but the location it was stated to have existed at the time indicated in the Event is doubtful.
But this doesn't address the "when" part of the Event. In some cases, the "when" might be the property that is called into doubt (e.g., a record for a passenger pigeon in North Carolina in 1976, when the actual date was probably 1876; or the record for a Pacific Golden Plover in Hawaii in July; the latter more plausible than the former, but still doubtful).
And, of course there is the "what" part of the Organism.  The Organism might have actually occurred at the time and location of the Event, but the identification of it is doubtful.  Indeed, this is often the basis for assertions of "doubtful" as applied to Occurrences -- meaning that no one doubts that the Organism existed, and that it occurred at the Event, but it was simply misidentified to the wrong taxon.
In other contexts, the very existence of the Organism might be in doubt.
Another problem with the coordinateUncertaintyInMeters solution, alluded to by @sarahcd, is that it this parameter is one step removed from the Occurrence itself. For example, suppose I conduct a fish transect at 2m depth in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, where I have good GPS-derived coordinates of the Location.  I record 25 Occurrences for the 25 different species I reportedly observed.  One of those species is otherwise only known to occur in Antarctica at depths of >1000m; thus the occurrence of an Organism of that taxon at that location is highly doubtful.  I can't just change the coordinateUncertaintyInMeters for the Location tied to that Event, because it would be incorrect for the other 24 Occurrence instances tied to that Event.  I have to create a new Location instance, and then create a new Event instance to link that new Location to the Organism to capture the "doubtfulness" of the Occurrence.
For these (and many other) reasons, I think it might be best to capture properties of "doubt" in some other way (e.g., via MeasurementOrFact?)  I realize that the term occurrenceStatus implies a suite of possible statuses, but this discussion emerged from the proposal to alter the definition of this term from:
"A statement about the presence or absence of a Taxon at a Location."
to:
"A statement about the presence or absence of an Organism within a bounded place and time."
(see #339)
In other words, to more properly match this property to an Occurrence sensu stricto (i.e., Organism-at-Event, instead of Taxon-at-Location).  The part of the definition that is not proposed to be changed is the "about the presence of absence" part.  Thus, it seems to me that a controlled vocabulary for this term should be restricted to "present" and "absent".  I could see an argument for adding "uncertain", but I fear that trying to add "doubtful" might overly complicate the purpose of this term and it's controlled values.

doubtful: "The taxon is scored as being present in the area but there is some doubt over the evidence."

For me, this seems to be conflating data and annotations in the same term. Is there ever an instance where a data provider/collector would put "doubtful" in that field? If not, then I think it needs to be a separate term.

That definition is not great. I just took it from the GBIF vocabulary. doubtful just means that there is doubt about the presence of the Taxon (or Organism) in an area.
There is no real distinction between an Organism-at-Event occurrence and a Taxon-at-Location occurrence, as an Organism belongs to a Taxon and an Event is at a Location. The difference is only in the size of the area and the duration of the Event, so a matter of scale more than anything else.

My perspective is similar on "extinct" or "extirpated". If the organism(s) were there at that time and place then the occurrenceStatus = "present". If a researcher goes out to a place where there was an organism there before but does not find it occurrenceStatus = "absent". I don't see how you would have an occurrence that has an occurrenceStatus = "extirpated" unless you find the last one that ever existed. Extinct/extirpated is a result from having multiple occurrenceStatus = present and then several at a later time that are absent.

That is all true of course, but extirpated is more informative, especially when the previous present records are not readily at hand. And if the duration of the Event is long enough an Organism can be extirpated during an Event. It is also possible to have PreservedSpecimens from Locations where the Taxon no longer occurs, for which dots still show up on maps and then an extirpated assertion makes more sense than an absent assertion. Not everybody may want to use these extra terms and they certainly do not apply in all situations/use cases, but we need them for floristic and faunistic data and they are occurrenceStatus, also under the changed definition of #339. And I do not understand what the problem is. TDWG vocabularies are SKOS vocabularies (I think), so there could just be statements like extirpated skos:broader absent and excluded skos:broader absent. Just makes for a better vocabulary.

For me, this seems to be conflating data and annotations in the same term.

I agree with @albenson-usgs here.  I didn't articulate it well in my previous post, but it seems to me the present/absent dichotomy represents primary data, as in: "I/we record this Organism at this Event" (present); or "I/we specifically looked for any Organism that I/we would consider to be a member of this Taxon at this Event, but we failed to find one" (absent).  However, a value of "doubtful" seems to me to only be applicable as an annotation on an earlier assertion of Occurrence, as in: "An Organism of this Taxon has been recorded at this Event by someone else, but we doubt its veracity."

I don't see how you would have an occurrence that has an occurrenceStatus = "extirpated" unless you find the last one that ever existed. Extinct/extirpated is a result from having multiple occurrenceStatus = present and then several at a later time that are absent.

and from @nielsklazenga :

What is the difference between an absence record based on a survey and one based on over a hundred years of collections and literature and knowledge of a taxon?

I think there can be a distinction, and I think this only works if we wish to document information about Taxon-at-Location instances through Occurrences by extending Organism to include "population", and including a time range context.  There are two different statements:

"We went out and looked for organisms we would identify as this taxon at this place on this day, and we failed to document any." [="absent"]
"After multiple failed attempts to locate any organisms we would identify as this taxon at this place over this time period, we assert that no organisms of this taxon currently exist at this location". [="extirpated"]

I believe it's possible to clearly make both statements through Occurrence instances, because both involve Location +Time  [=Event] + Organism + taxonomic Identification.  The main difference is that the former would presumably score the Organism as a single individual and provide a precise Location and time fort the Event, and the latter would score the Organism as a population, with broader/less precise values of Location and time.
Incidentally, the recording of "absent" is a little odd to capture for the first type in the list above, because it implies the existence of an Organism with an asserted taxonomic Identification that was absent from the Event.  We deal with this in our implementation by allowing the creation of "virtual" Organism instances -- referring to the abstract idea of an Organism, rather than a particular Organism (we established this in part to accommodate recording explicit "absences").
All that said, I am still uncomfortable using occurrenceStatus to capture what seems to me to be, as @albenson-usgs noted, a conflation of data and annotations.

There is no real distinction between an Organism-at-Event occurrence and a Taxon-at-Location occurrence, as an Organism belongs to a Taxon (and an Organism can comprise anything from an individual organism to an entire taxon) and an Event is at a Location. The difference is only in the size of the area and the duration of the Event, a matter of scale more than anything else.

Well... I think there is a difference between Organism-at-Event and Taxon-at-Location in that the latter has no time component.  I would agree that there is (potentially) no difference between Organism-at-Event and Taxon-at-Event (allowing for sufficiently broad ranges of time) -- especially if we agree that:

an Organism can comprise anything from an individual organism to an entire taxon

[And we do seem to agree about this!]

I do not think we really disagree on any of this, but if people want to make this distinction and want a term for use with only primary occurrence data that only allows the values present and absent, that is a new term. As it stands now, the proposed vocabulary (this issue) does not fit the proposed definition (#339) for occurrenceStatus and  violates the stability requirement in the Vocabulary Maintenance Specification.

Sorry, could not let it go...

Well... I think there is a difference between Organism-at-Event and Taxon-at-Location in that the latter has no time component. I would agree that there is (potentially) no difference between Organism-at-Event and Taxon-at-Event

Occurrences do have a time component by definition; it is not brought by the Event. Darwin Core Events are actions by humans or machines and only coincide with Occurrences. If there is a difference between Organism-at-Event and Taxon-at-Location, it is not in the nature of the Occurrence, but in the nature of the Observation.

Occurrences do have a time component by definition; it is not brought by the Event. Darwin Core Events are actions by humans or machines and only coincide with Occurrences. If there is a difference between Organism-at-Event and Taxon-at-Location, it is not in the nature of the Occurrence, but in the nature of the Observation.

I disagree.  There are no date or time properties associated with the Occurrence class in DwC -- these properties are inherited from the associated  dwc:Event (eventDate, eventTime, startDayOfYear, endDayOfYear, year, month, day, verbatimEventDate).  This is why I refer to an Occurrence as the intersection of an Organism and an Event.  The taxonomic identification of the Occurrence is inherited from the Organism; the time and Location of the Occurrence are inherited from the Event.
Obviously, DwC is not an ontology, so the organization of terms within classes does not mandate that the terms only be used in connection with the associated classes.  However, a big part of these various discussions is about inferring an ontology (of sorts) or semantic data model from the clustering of DwC terms within the DwC classes.  And in that context, Occurrence instances inherit their location and time properties from an associated Event, just as they inherit their taxonomic identification properties from an associated Organism.

I do not understand where you get these notions from. These are the definitions:

Occurrence
An existence of an Organism (sensu http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Organism) at a particular place at a particular time.

Event
An action that occurs at some location during some time.
Example: A specimen collection process. A camera trap image capture. A marine trawl.

Looks to me Occurrence has a time component (by definition) and is independent of an Event. The only interface between an Occurrence and an Event is that they happen at the same place and the same time, so coincidence.

Obviously, DwC is not an ontology, so the organization of terms within classes does not mandate that the terms only be used in connection with the associated classes. However, a big part of these various discussions is about inferring an ontology (of sorts) or semantic data model from the clustering of DwC terms within the DwC classes. And in that context, Occurrence instances inherit their location and time properties from an associated Event, just as they inherit their taxonomic identification properties from an associated Organism.

Darwin Core is a vocabulary, so I think it would be best if we would keep the data models out of it and stick to the definitions. The only thing that matters for a term to be included in a controlled vocabulary is (1) whether it is used within the domain the standard applies to (all the terms that I suggested are) and (2) whether it fits the definition of the term the vocabulary is for (they all do). Everything else is irrelevant. If there is going to be a normative vocabulary (I would prefer it to be informative), it has to be inclusive.
That being said, I think you are confusing occurrences and observations and you have an interesting idea of inheritance.

I have to agree with @deepreef here. I disagree that the definitions of the terms are the only thing that matters. If you look at the terms that are included in the Occurrence Class you won't find any that cover time or place. To me Darwin Core is less of a vocabulary and more of a way to model data (e.g. scientific names can be column headers because all scientific names need to fall under scientificName). Actually modeling the data using Darwin Core is what allows for the integration of multiple datasets together. To me that's the whole point.

Hi @nielsklazenga :

I do not understand where you get these notions from.

Well... I guess from many, many conversations at TDWG meetings and other gatherings and emails and other online discussions going back to the very earliest days of Darwin Core.  As I said, nobody misinterprets DwC as an Ontology, but the discussions surrounding its creation and evolution are definitely driven by a need for ontological interpretations of the terms.  That's why the Classes were added originally.  Admittedly, some have explored this more explicitly than others -- for example Roger Hyam did some of the early work in this direction, and @baskaufs and Cam Webb developed Darwin-SW.  More generally, coming to a common consensus of the core "objects" in biodiversity informatics informs the need to establish new terms and refine existing terms in ways that better allow content holders to share data in a more consistent and "actionable" way.
So yes, in one sense, DwC is just a "bag of terms" that have clear definitions, which are only "organized" in classes.  However, each xxxxID term in DwC implies a conceptual object to which specific properties apply, and the more consistent data providers are with establishing parity/cardinality between DwC terms as properties applied to corresponding conceptual objects represented by xxxxxID terms, the more effective our ability will be in sharing data with each other in a way that empowers aggregate analysis.
So, when I read the definition of dwc:Occurrence as "An existence of an Organism at a particular place at a particular time", and Event as "An action that occurs at some location during some time", I interpret: Occurrence = Organism+Event; where the "what" part (Organism) is explicitly referenced in the definition of Occurrence, and the "where/when" part (Event) is implicitly referenced in the definition of Occurrence.
If I'm not alone in this interpretation, then perhaps we should consider modifying the definition of Occurrence to be something more explicit for both Occurrence and Event, like:
"An existence of an Organism (sensu http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Organism) at a particular Event (sensu http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event)."
Would you (or anyone else) object to such a refinement of the definition of dwc:Occurrence?

Would you (or anyone else) object to such a refinement of the definition of dwc:Occurrence?

Not offhand, as long as there is an alternative in Darwin Core for the use cases that will no longer be accommodated. I think it would make much more sense to have dwc:Occurrence as a superclass that has the properties that are shared between more specific ObservedOccurrence and TaxonAreaOccurrence classes. Also observing that Occurrences s.str. can only be present; as soon as you allow absent, you are in the domain of Occurrences s.l.
The argument here though is not about which data containers we should have. it is about whether 'doubtful', 'excluded' and 'extirpated' are in scope for a vocabulary for occurrenceStatus, or rather whether a vocabulary with only 'absent' and 'present' is sufficient. The scope of dwc:Occurrence as a data carrying object is irrelevant here. In fact, occurrenceStatus only make sense on data objects that are not quite occurrences, as occurrences are by definition present and an "absent" occurrence is not an occurrence.

@tucotuco in #339:

Does the proposal to have a controlled vocabulary for occurrenceStatus hold merit? 'Yes' 'Yes'

Should there be additional values in the controlled vocabulary? Controversial
Comment: So far there is no consensus on the inclusion of any terms other than present and absent.

This is turning the world upside-down a bit. If you enforce a vocabulary on a term that did not have one before, the initial vocabulary needs to include all the terms that have been used (appropriately, in accordance with the definition) before. You cannot just start with an empty vocabulary and require community consensus on whether a new controlled term should be included or not, as it becomes about people accepting or rejecting other people's use cases, rather than about the meaning of terms.
I think the purpose of vocabularies should be mainly to enable interpretation of the values that people deliver, rather than cramping people's style. The latter seems more a job for application profiles. It is mostly this part of the proposal that bothers me:

The list of terms page for the controlled vocabulary will contain instructions that the controlled value strings MUST be used as values for dwc:occurrenceStatus and that term IRIs MUST be used as values for dwciri:occurrenceStatus.

...,, but maybe I am interpreting this incorrectly and it means that the controlled terms can only be used with occurrence status and nowhere else (bit difficult for 'present' and 'absent') rather than that these are the only terms that can be used with occurrenceStatus. @baskaufs , could you explain?

Is the proposed definition of present satisfactory? 'No'
Comment: The definition will have to be in accord with the final accepted definition of occurrenceStatus. A generic definition that will almost certainly work regardless of other concerns is something like the following:
the target was detected within the given bounds of place and time
Is the proposed definition of absent satisfactory? 'No'
Comment: The definition will have to be in accord with the final accepted definition of occurrenceStatus. A generic definition that will almost certainly work regardless of other concerns is something like the following:
the target was not detected within the given bounds of place and time

These definitions are not what 'present' and 'absent' mean. Moreover, they place 'present' and 'absent' firmly out of scope of a vocabulary on occurrenceStatus, as they are not about the occurrence, but the observation. If people really want to have a term only about whether an occurrence has been detected or not, I'd suggest that requires a new property.

This proposal has been labeled as 'Controversial' and in need of a task group to for resolution. It is no longer part of an active public review.


Separate Portable Builds

The current portable build script is getting messy and unnecessarily complex. We should separate the Linux build of portable out of the python script and into our Scons build scripts. The portable python build script then would be dedicated to windows.
To Reproduce
See the portable build script.
Expected behavior
Portable for Windows is built with the dedicate python script and portable for Linux is built through scons.

where is the portable build script?

earthenterprise/earth_enterprise/src/portableserver/build.py

c++ please @tst-cjeffries

This build script, and the scons scripts that would also need to be modified are python. C++ is currently not used to actually build portable. There is some C++ code involved with portable, but it will likely not need adjusted.

i saw ur issue on the issue hub as i filtered issues as c++ and beginners,
and that is why i asked u , . u shouldnt have mentioned that issue with a
c++ tag
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 8:46 PM tst-cjeffries<EMAIL_ADDRESS>wrote:

This build script, and the scons scripts that would also need to be
modified are python. C++ is currently not used to actually build portable.
There is some C++ code involved with portable, but it will likely not need
adjusted.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/google/earthenterprise/issues/1713#issuecomment-616620072,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AN6P37TW75MGFERGZJDKH43RNRRNNANCNFSM4MKABEMQ
.

Sorry for the confusion. Our issues are tagged C++ because our repository is primarily C++ and tagged as such.


Tor integration

I finished the Tor integration and tested it on Ubuntu and Windows 7. It works flawlessly.
Setting up Tor
There is no need for the user to do any settings manually, except that the user has to make sure Tor is in the PATH of its operating system.
Local vs remote
If the Tumbler is running locally, it will not use Tor. Therefore a remote server is needed for testing. For this purpose I used @NicolasDorier 's testnet tumbler server, which can be set up in the client.config file as follows: tumbler.server=http://testnet.ntumblebit.metaco.com.
What it does?
Whenever any HTTP request is sent to the Tumbler the it checks if the identity the software wants to send the request is the same as the last request was sent with and if it's not it chanes Tor circuit, before the request is sent.
An identity is defined by TumbleBit's Alice Bob role's and the cycle they are in.
Example:
CHANGE IP: 0 sec
	Alice 1152052
	POST /api/v1/tumblers/0/clientchannels/confirm

CHANGE IP: 4 sec
	Alice 1152054
	POST /api/v1/tumblers/0/clientchannels/

CHANGE IP: 0 sec
	Bob 1152052
	POST /api/v1/tumblers/0/channels/
	Bob 1152052
	POST /api/v1/tumblers/0/channels/1152052/a914ae1cb6ddde39f7b9fe4d8027fbe06809d8d057cd87/signhashes
	Bob 1152052
	POST /api/v1/tumblers/0/channels/1152052/a914ae1cb6ddde39f7b9fe4d8027fbe06809d8d057cd87/checkrevelation

CHANGE IP: 0 sec
	Bob 1152058
	GET /api/v1/tumblers/0/vouchers/

Additional notes / ToDo

[ ] Before merge -  I am writing a torchangelog.txt inside the NTumbleBit.ClassicTumbler.Client.CLI directory. This is a quick messy logging it must be removed. The output of this file is the example above.
[ ] After merge - Update the wiki

Big picture
This is the last major milestone that'll make TumbleBit protocol implementation a complete Bitcoin anonymity technique. The rest is UX, bug fixing and optimization.

No need to remove the HTTP proxy support.
Also no need to change the TumblerClient methods. Just having a Runtime.CreateClient(int cycle, bool isAlice) instead of the properties Alice/Bob.
I can fix on top of your PR or you do?

No need to remove the HTTP proxy support.

In that case a simple TumbleBit Sudoku by the Tumbler will deanonymize the users:

Also no need to change the TumblerClient methods. Just having a Runtime.CreateClient(int cycle, bool isAlice) instead of the properties Alice/Bob. I can fix on top of your PR or you do?

Yes do it please, I'm not entirely sure what you mean.

I would say that the same HTTP Proxy can be shared by multiple Alice. Or some people might still want to use privoxy because it is already set up in their environment.
@EthanHeilman what do you think? Should we drop the ability to configure an http proxy on TB? Anyway, I think it is better we remove proxy support on a separate commit.

There is a memory leak. I don't know if it's because of my Tor integration or not, if you run the software for half a day or more you'll see it eating up the memory.
I am testing it now without Tor integration. I'll come back with the results.

@NicolasDorier Please revert these commits and work on this branch.
https://github.com/NTumbleBit/NTumbleBit/commit/d1cb4cbcda3b248c85b1b23fe27e917c81cfe87f
https://github.com/NTumbleBit/NTumbleBit/commit/ad664124ab61c75ba623965f5322471c27c14f65
https://github.com/NTumbleBit/NTumbleBit/commit/e08c2a32e99bee3dba12d26d09dfe31a4c5cd21a
You created many conflicts, also an "Identity" class that has different meanining in my implementation.

@NicolasDorier @nopara73 The tumbler should commit to a single way of communicating with the users when it commits to the pubkey and other public parameters to prevent fingerprint by IP address or privacy method used.

We should use TOR by default, but have an option to disable it for testing without TOR.
The code should call a Communication superclass rather than the TOR class direct to enable adding new communication methods in case TOR becomes obsolete or Bitcoin network privacy services are developed and deployed.


Move all assembly to C files compiled with the gcc crate to avoid having  to use the asm feature

With Rust 1.0 (coming soon-ish), its my understanding that asm!() is not going to be available. So, this PR moves all the assembly that I could over to C files that are compiled with GCC using a Cargo build script and the gcc crate. I couldn't figure out how to reasonably move the ghash asm!() functions over to C code called via an extern fn. So, this PR removes them. Ideally, it would be possible to figure out how to handle this better before merging this PR.
Anyway, since this is a Rust 1.0 thing, I don't plan on merging this until closer to Rust 1.0 or until asm!() becomes unavailable in regular Rust builds.

I haven't tested this on ARM or 32-bit x86 yet, either. I'll also do those tests before merging. I'm not quite sure how to cross-compile with Cargo, though. So, if anyone know hows to, please let me know!

This was merged into master in another PR.


Update Claude to new names & update activeApiModes

Hi,
I noticed Poe changed some of Claude's bots to new names so I edited them to match it.
Also, I added all the missing bots to "activeApiModes" because I think it's something related to clearing the context when opening a new chat
Thanks

Ops, looks duplicated :D