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

Adding up budget-not-provided separately #537 #555

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 25, 2019

Conversation

Ocre42
Copy link
Contributor

@Ocre42 Ocre42 commented Jun 25, 2019

Addressing #537
Forwardlooking activities with budget-not-provided will be added up separately instead of replacing the activities that provide budgets.

@Ocre42 Ocre42 requested a review from samuele-mattiuzzo June 25, 2019 11:41
@samuele-mattiuzzo samuele-mattiuzzo merged commit f72e3aa into master Jun 25, 2019
row['year_columns'][1][year] = by_hierarchy[hierarchies_with_nonzero_budgets[0]][forwardlooking_budget].get(year) or 0
row['year_columns'][1][year] = by_hierarchy[hierarchies_with_nonzero_budgets[0]]['forwardlooking_activities_with_budgets'].get(year) or 0
if row['budget_not_provided']:
by_hierarchy[hierarchies_with_nonzero_budgets[0]]['forwardlooking_activities_with_budget_not_provided'].get(year) or 0
Copy link
Contributor

@andylolz andylolz Jun 26, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Something doesn’t look quite right here – there’s no equals sign on this line. Presumably this is supposed to say:

row['year_columns'][1][year] +=

…or similar?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like this has been addressed in #556.

@andylolz
Copy link
Contributor

andylolz commented Jun 26, 2019

I don’t think this PR attempts to address #537. I.e. it doesn’t attempt to split the figure for activities that include a budget from the figure for activities that explicitly declare budget-not-provided.

I think it might instead be attempting to address #537 (comment).

@Ocre42
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ocre42 commented Jun 27, 2019

Yes, this addresses the comment specifically, but there is no intention to separate the budget-not-provided attribute from the budgets in calculations, as this is done to follow the existing methodology.

@andylolz
Copy link
Contributor

andylolz commented Jun 27, 2019

this is done to follow the existing methodology.

I responded to that point in this comment: #537 (comment)

But okay, that’s fine. I guess #537 can be closed as a wontfix, then.

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.

3 participants