Skip to content

docs: Remove duplicated 'layer' parameter from PCA documentation - #4202

Merged
ilan-gold merged 4 commits into
scverse:mainfrom
AlbertoFabbri93:patch-1
Jul 14, 2026
Merged

docs: Remove duplicated 'layer' parameter from PCA documentation#4202
ilan-gold merged 4 commits into
scverse:mainfrom
AlbertoFabbri93:patch-1

Conversation

@AlbertoFabbri93

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Fix small documentation error: the 'layer' parameter is documented twice for the PCA preprocessing function.

The 'layer' parameter is documented twice in the PCA function documentation.
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 79.93%. Comparing base (c52da39) to head (72fab54).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #4202   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   79.93%   79.93%           
=======================================
  Files         121      121           
  Lines       12958    12958           
=======================================
  Hits        10358    10358           
  Misses       2600     2600           
Flag Coverage Δ
hatch-test.low-vers 79.06% <ø> (ø)
hatch-test.pre 79.88% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/scanpy/preprocessing/_pca/__init__.py 91.92% <ø> (ø)

@Zethson Zethson added this to the 1.12.3 milestone Jul 8, 2026
@Zethson

Zethson commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Great! If you'd like, you could add a small release note to be credited later when we make a release. Otherwise, I'll get this in as is.

@Zethson Zethson changed the title Remove duplicated 'layer' parameter from PCA documentation docs: Remove duplicated 'layer' parameter from PCA documentation Jul 8, 2026
@AlbertoFabbri93

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Nah, it's okay. You can merge as is.

@Zethson

Zethson commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
generating indices... /home/docs/checkouts/readthedocs.org/user_builds/icb-scanpy/checkouts/4202/docs/release-notes/1.6.0.md:44: WARNING: unknown document: 'anndata:concatenation' [ref.doc]

shouldn't be your fault. I'll take care of this soon

@ilan-gold
ilan-gold enabled auto-merge (squash) July 14, 2026 16:47
@ilan-gold
ilan-gold merged commit 8a2be72 into scverse:main Jul 14, 2026
14 checks passed
@lumberbot-app

lumberbot-app Bot commented Jul 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Owee, I'm MrMeeseeks, Look at me.

There seem to be a conflict, please backport manually. Here are approximate instructions:

  1. Checkout backport branch and update it.
git checkout 1.12.x
git pull
  1. Cherry pick the first parent branch of the this PR on top of the older branch:
git cherry-pick -x -m1 8a2be721bac37268eedb6cb625666fe35dc5f930
  1. You will likely have some merge/cherry-pick conflict here, fix them and commit:
git commit -am "Backport PR #4202: docs: Remove duplicated 'layer' parameter from PCA documentation"
  1. Push to a named branch:
git push YOURFORK 1.12.x:auto-backport-of-pr-4202-on-1.12.x
  1. Create a PR against branch 1.12.x, I would have named this PR:

"Backport PR #4202 on branch 1.12.x (docs: Remove duplicated 'layer' parameter from PCA documentation)"

And apply the correct labels and milestones.

Congratulations — you did some good work! Hopefully your backport PR will be tested by the continuous integration and merged soon!

Remember to remove the Still Needs Manual Backport label once the PR gets merged.

If these instructions are inaccurate, feel free to suggest an improvement.

ilan-gold added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 15, 2026
… documentation (#4216)

Co-authored-by: Alberto Fabbri <alberto_fabbri.git@yahoo.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants