Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SPARKNLP-669 Adding missing inputAnnotatorTypes #13144

Conversation

danilojsl
Copy link
Contributor

@danilojsl danilojsl commented Nov 24, 2022

Description

Adding missing inputAnnotatorTypes in Python and removing redundant imports

Motivation and Context

Check issue #13133 and #13131

How Has This Been Tested?

  • Local Tests

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Code improvements with no or little impact
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING page.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

@maziyarpanahi maziyarpanahi self-assigned this Nov 26, 2022
@maziyarpanahi maziyarpanahi added the DON'T MERGE Do not merge this PR label Nov 26, 2022
@maziyarpanahi maziyarpanahi changed the base branch from master to feature/424-release-candidate November 28, 2022 10:10
…9-some-annotator-model-in-python-dont-have-annotator-type-check
@maziyarpanahi maziyarpanahi merged commit 12c783a into feature/424-release-candidate Nov 28, 2022
@KshitizGIT KshitizGIT deleted the feature/SPARKNLP-669-some-annotator-model-in-python-dont-have-annotator-type-check branch March 2, 2023 10:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug-fix DON'T MERGE Do not merge this PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants