Milestone 4 Feedback

[zwarham]

• Submission (4)
  o 4/4 mechanics
• Improving your app (20)
  o 20/20 mechanics
• Reproducibility – testing (10)
  o 0/5 mechanics
   Not enough test that cases (required 3)
  o 5/5 accuracy
• Reproducibility – continuous integration and deployment
  o 5/5 mechanics
  o 0/5 accuracy
   Deploy_app.yaml is not passing
• Tie it all together and deliver a production ready app (50)
  o 20/20 mechanics
  o 10/20 accuracy
   Some cities do not work (eg. Dubois in WY)
   When selecting a city in one state and then following that with another state, it reacts twice (once for the change in state and once for the change in city) which causes the widgets to flash
  o 10/10 visualization
• Reflection
  o 6/6 reasoning

[eyrexh]

Hi Zac @zwarham ,

Thank you for your feedback. I got some questions regarding the grading. We have 4 tests to pass, which is more than 3 and shows in the passing information. Also, we follow what Florencia taught and the ci/cd passed that our pages can be updated on shiny every time we push the commits. May I know what the Deploy_app.yaml do in this case? Thank you.
Team 3

[renee-kwon]

Hi @zwarham, could we also get some clarification for our deductions for "Tie it all together and deliver a production ready app"? (10 mark deduction)

1. There is no city "Dubois in WY" as in your comment. I checked all cities for WY (and other states) and they are all working correctly.
2. I understand your comment about the flashing of the widgets when switching states, but the milestone description states: "reactive options should be working and not giving any errors." This is what we have with our reactive elements. Could you explain how the flashing resulted in deductions in accuracy?
   Thank you.

[zwarham]

Hi Zac @zwarham ,

Thank you for your feedback. I got some questions regarding the grading. We have 4 tests to pass, which is more than 3 and shows in the passing information. Also, we follow what Florencia taught and the ci/cd passed that our pages can be updated on shiny every time we push the commits. May I know what the Deploy_app.yaml do in this case? Thank you. Team 3

Hi, this is the information we look at for the workflows

As for the tests, I only see two in the required document - https://github.com/UBC-MDS/citytemp/blob/main/tests/testthat/test-shinytest2.R

[zwarham]

Hi @zwarham, could we also get some clarification for our deductions for "Tie it all together and deliver a production ready app"? (10 mark deduction)

1. There is no city "Dubois in WY" as in your comment. I checked all cities for WY (and other states) and they are all working correctly.
2. I understand your comment about the flashing of the widgets when switching states, but the milestone description states: "reactive options should be working and not giving any errors." This is what we have with our reactive elements. Could you explain how the flashing resulted in deductions in accuracy?
   Thank you.

Please see attached picture for Dubois - it shows on the map but not in the dropdown

The double flashing is because your widgets react to multiple sources that change each other. Your children elements are reacting on each other instead of their parents. You should either have a hierarchical react order or a delay to avoid reacting more than once

[eyrexh]

Hi @zwarham ,

I think you should not check the commit message for a specific file since when we merge the pull request too soon, the merge also triggers one deployment so the pull request one failed due to multiple deployment. Please check our action workflow at last and also our badge shows ci/cd works.

For the tests, I think she mentions the number should be the “PASS” one. I created both screenshots and value checking for 2 actions so it is 2*2=4 tests. Thank you.

Team 3

[zwarham]

Hi @zwarham ,

I think you should not check the commit message for a specific file since when we merge the pull request too soon, the merge also triggers one deployment so the pull request one failed due to multiple deployment. Please check our action workflow at last and also our badge shows ci/cd works.

For the tests, I think she mentions the number should be the “PASS” one. I created both screenshots and value checking for 2 actions so it is 2*2=4 tests. Thank you.

Team 3

Unfortunately these are the instructions provided by Florencia for grading. If you disagree, please create a regrade request on Slack by creating a group conversation with Florencia, myself and your group members and explain to Florencia your reasoning.

[flor14]

Yes, sometimes the GitHub action workflow can fail due to multiple deployments, that is correct.
The app is MUCH BETTER than the one you showed me in the last lab. Well done with the improvements. Congratulations!

[eyrexh]

Thank you for your feedback @flor14 . Just to double confirm that you mean the multiple deployments cause that specific commit failed is a one-time issue and our workflow works great for all the later commits, so we can get full marks for the ci/cd. Thank you!

Reproducibility – continuous integration and deployment
o 5/5 mechanics
o 0/5 accuracy
 Deploy_app.yaml is not passing

[snesunil]

Hi @flor14,

Thank you for reviewing the above request 😊. We also wanted to discuss the following items -

a) The 10 marks deduction in the "Tie it all together and deliver a production-ready app" - accuracy.

The information shown on the page is accurate based on the selection in the drop-downs. As per the design, the cities drop-down is populated with the cities in the current selected state. We are considering the state drop-down as the parent element here. Hence, if a state is changed, the cities drop-down will get updated and the reactive elements also will be updated as per the selected state and first item in the city dropdown.

b) 5 marks deduction in Reproducibility – testing

We have implemented 2 testthat functions that works as expected. But 0 marks were given for mechanics in this section.
Could you please check if we are eligible for additional points as 15 marks in total were deducted?

This is the link to the app.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Group 3

[flor14]

Regrading request:

a) The 10 marks deduction in the "Tie it all together and deliver a production-ready app" - accuracy.

I will consider this discount correct based on 2 aspects:

• The UI could be better organized. When you choose different cities the map of the country does not change. It would be better to (a) use tabs or (b) organize the interface in such a way that it is understood that the dropdown menus are affecting only the line chart and the boxes. We talked about this in the laboratory.
• The "Select Temperature" radio button is available when you are plotting precipitation. You could create a dynamic UI to make this button appear only when you want to plot temperature.

b) deduction in Reproducibility – testing

I have returned 10 points for the workflows because this is a grading error