Skip to content

Fix test to suppress warning on allocate_budget_to_maximize_response #1603

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

Conversation

caiquefortunato
Copy link

@caiquefortunato caiquefortunato commented Mar 29, 2025

Description

This PR updates a test in test_mmm.py to suppress a warning emitted by allocate_budget_to_maximize_response when noise_level is not set appropriately.

Related Issue

Checklist


📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pymc-marketing--1603.org.readthedocs.build/en/1603/

@github-actions github-actions bot added the tests label Mar 29, 2025
@williambdean
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @caiquefortunato

Thanks for the PR!

It is a deprecated method. We should use the new method instead of surpressing

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 29, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.51%. Comparing base (975472d) to head (7b39ddd).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1603   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.51%   93.51%           
=======================================
  Files          55       55           
  Lines        6342     6342           
=======================================
  Hits         5931     5931           
  Misses        411      411           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@cetagostini
Copy link
Contributor

@caiquefortunato thank you! Can you update the test to use the new method? This will be in sync with #1604 🙌🏻

@caiquefortunato
Copy link
Author

@cetagostini Thank you for the feedback! Since I updated the test in PR #1604 using the new method, I believe this PR (#1603) is no longer necessary. I can close it if you agree.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants