Requirements simplification, part 2: The Return of the -ML.txt

[Scitator]

Before submitting

• Was this discussed/approved via a Github issue? (no need for typos and docs improvements)
• Did you read the contribution guide?
• Did you check the code style? catalyst-make-codestyle && catalyst-check-codestyle (pip install -U catalyst-codestyle).
• Did you make sure to update the docs? We use Google format for all the methods and classes.
• Did you check the docs with make check-docs?
• Did you write any new necessary tests?
• Did you check that your code passes the unit tests pytest . ?
• Did you add your new functionality to the docs?
• Did you update the CHANGELOG?

Description

Related Issue

Type of Change

• Examples / docs / tutorials / contributors update
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Improvement (non-breaking change which improves an existing feature)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

PR review

Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.

PS

• I know, that I could join slack for pull request discussion.

[pep8speaks]

Hello @Scitator! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for PEP 8 issues, and found:

• In the file catalyst/contrib/callbacks/__init__.py:

Line 44:1: E402 module level import not at top of file
Line 45:1: E402 module level import not at top of file
Line 46:1: E402 module level import not at top of file
Line 89:1: E402 module level import not at top of file
Line 130:1: E402 module level import not at top of file

Comment last updated at 2020-12-01 16:00:35 UTC