Skip to content

[DOCS] ExpectAI approval workflow #11072

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

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

klavavej
Copy link
Contributor

@klavavej klavavej commented Apr 8, 2025

Resolves https://greatexpectations.atlassian.net/browse/DOC-1105 according to the plan linked in that issue

@netlify /docs/cloud/expectations/manage_expectations/#generate-expectations-with-expectai-beta

  • 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!

Copy link

netlify bot commented Apr 8, 2025

Deploy Preview for niobium-lead-7998 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit dd6d2ad
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/niobium-lead-7998/deploys/67f6f818b07ef80008a6d78b
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-11072.docs.greatexpectations.io/docs/cloud/expectations/manage_expectations/#generate-expectations-with-expectai-beta
📱 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 site configuration.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 8, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 80.96%. Comparing base (41fff7b) to head (dd6d2ad).
Report is 9 commits behind head on develop.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop   #11072   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    80.96%   80.96%           
========================================
  Files          487      487           
  Lines        41161    41161           
========================================
  Hits         33325    33325           
  Misses        7836     7836           
Flag Coverage Δ
3.10 70.35% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️
3.10 athena or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds ?
3.10 aws_deps ?
3.10 big ?
3.10 clickhouse ?
3.10 filesystem ?
3.10 mssql ?
3.10 mysql ?
3.10 postgresql ?
3.10 spark_connect ?
3.10 trino ?
3.11 70.37% <ø> (ø)
3.11 athena or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds ?
3.11 aws_deps ?
3.11 big ?
3.11 clickhouse ?
3.11 filesystem ?
3.11 mssql ?
3.11 mysql ?
3.11 postgresql ?
3.12 70.38% <ø> (ø)
3.12 athena or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds 56.84% <ø> (ø)
3.12 aws_deps 46.66% <ø> (ø)
3.12 big 55.04% <ø> (ø)
3.12 bigquery 49.24% <ø> (ø)
3.12 databricks 50.88% <ø> (ø)
3.12 filesystem 63.15% <ø> (ø)
3.12 mssql 51.94% <ø> (ø)
3.12 mysql 52.20% <ø> (ø)
3.12 postgresql 54.85% <ø> (ø)
3.12 redshift 48.57% <ø> (ø)
3.12 snowflake 51.64% <ø> (ø)
3.12 spark 58.10% <ø> (ø)
3.12 spark_connect 46.98% <ø> (ø)
3.12 trino 52.62% <ø> (ø)
3.9 70.39% <ø> (ø)
3.9 athena or openpyxl or pyarrow or project or sqlite or aws_creds 56.84% <ø> (ø)
3.9 aws_deps 46.68% <ø> (ø)
3.9 big 55.06% <ø> (ø)
3.9 bigquery 49.23% <ø> (ø)
3.9 clickhouse 43.60% <ø> (ø)
3.9 databricks 50.87% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
3.9 filesystem 63.15% <ø> (ø)
3.9 mssql 51.93% <ø> (ø)
3.9 mysql 52.18% <ø> (ø)
3.9 postgresql 54.84% <ø> (ø)
3.9 redshift 48.57% <ø> (ø)
3.9 snowflake 51.64% <ø> (ø)
3.9 spark 58.06% <ø> (ø)
3.9 spark_connect 46.99% <ø> (ø)
3.9 trino 52.60% <ø> (ø)
cloud 0.00% <ø> (ø)
docs-basic 54.14% <ø> (ø)
docs-creds-needed 52.98% <ø> (ø)
docs-spark 52.56% <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.

@klavavej klavavej marked this pull request as ready for review April 8, 2025 17:09
:::note This might take a few minutes
ExpectAI may take a few minutes to analyze your data and recommend personalized Expectations. You can navigate away from the page while ExpectAI works in the background. GX will email you when your recommended Expectations are ready for review.
:::
4. Review the generated Expectations and **Approve** (✓) or **Reject** (✗) them within 48 hours. After that, the recommendations will be discarded.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
4. Review the generated Expectations and **Approve** (✓) or **Reject** (✗) them within 48 hours. After that, the recommendations will be discarded.
4. Review the generated Expectations and **Approve** (✓) or **Reject** (✗) them within 48 hours. After that, any undecided recommendations will be discarded.

My suggestion here isn't the best wording, but I'm wondering if we need to highlight that it's only the recommendations in the "non-approved & non-rejected" state that will be discarded?

That could be covered by the antecedent use of "recommendations" rather than "Expectations," but I wonder if people will possibly read it as discarding ExpectAI things they've already approved/rejected.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@klavavej klavavej Apr 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmmm I see what you mean but something about "undecided" feels off to me - like it's describing the recommendation's state of mind rather than a lack of user action regarding the recommendation. Probably I just have a strong association of the word "undecided" and the term "undecided voter" in my mind. I'll make a different change in the spirit of this suggestion.

Suggested change
4. Review the generated Expectations and **Approve** (✓) or **Reject** (✗) them within 48 hours. After that, the recommendations will be discarded.
4. Review the recommended Expectations and **Approve** (✓) or **Reject** (✗) them within 48 hours. After 48 hours, any remaining recommendations will be discarded.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@klavavej Sorry I missed this! I didn't get the notification from github. And yes, totally agree with the associations between "undecided" and "undecided voter". I like the proposed changes you've got here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks! if everything looks good now, would you please approve this PR?

@klavavej klavavej requested a review from shiplet April 9, 2025 22:51
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