Skip to content

DOC:add link for detail explanation in glossary/estimator-tags #14616

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 12, 2020
Merged

DOC:add link for detail explanation in glossary/estimator-tags #14616

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 12, 2020

Conversation

sameshl
Copy link
Contributor

@sameshl sameshl commented Aug 9, 2019

closes #14083

@sameshl
Copy link
Contributor Author

sameshl commented Aug 9, 2019

@qinhanmin2014 I am not entirely familiar with how the description needs to be updated in https://scikit-learn.org/dev/glossary.html#term-estimator-tags for estimator tags. Can you help me out.

@amueller
Copy link
Member

can you please merge with master so we can more easily see the result of the rendering?
Also, the glossary still says that it's a proposed feature, while it's now an implemented feature

@sameshl
Copy link
Contributor Author

sameshl commented Sep 28, 2019

@amueller Will do.

Copy link
Member

@NicolasHug NicolasHug left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Rendered html looks good

@qinhanmin2014 qinhanmin2014 merged commit 133d1ce into scikit-learn:master Jan 12, 2020
@sameshl sameshl deleted the doc_glossary branch January 13, 2020 02:58
thomasjpfan pushed a commit to thomasjpfan/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Feb 22, 2020
panpiort8 pushed a commit to panpiort8/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2020
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.

estimator tags entry in glossary seems outdated
5 participants