feat: Migrate EPA facility ID retrieval to use the Data Commons client API instead of direct SPARQL queries

[rohitkumarbhagat]

No description provided.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refactors the EPA facility ID retrieval mechanism. Previously, the system relied on direct SPARQL queries to the Data Commons API. This change transitions the retrieval process to use the dedicated Data Commons client API, streamlining the interaction with the data platform and improving maintainability.

Highlights

• API Migration: The script for downloading existing EPA facility IDs has been migrated from using direct SPARQL queries via the requests library to utilizing the dedicated Data Commons client API.
• Dependency Update: The direct dependency on the requests library for API calls was removed from the main script.
• Test Refactoring: The corresponding unit tests were updated to mock the Data Commons client API interactions, replacing the previous requests_mock setup for SPARQL calls.
• Data Processing Logic: The logic for extracting facility IDs was adjusted to correctly parse responses from the new Data Commons client API, including handling potential duplicate IDs and null values.

Changelog

• scripts/us_epa/parent_company/download_existing_facilities.py
  • Removed direct requests dependency and related SPARQL URL constant.
  • Updated API key retrieval to use get_datacommons_client.
  • Replaced SPARQL query execution with Data Commons client API calls for node property fetching.
  • Adjusted facility ID extraction logic to handle the new API response format and ensure uniqueness.
• scripts/us_epa/parent_company/download_existing_facilities_test.py
  • Removed requests_mock dependency and SPARQL URL import.
  • Refactored test cases to mock the Data Commons client API for fetch_property_values.
  • Updated assertions to validate the correct interaction with the new client API.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request migrates the EPA facility ID retrieval process from direct SPARQL queries to using the Data Commons client API. This change simplifies the code and leverages the Data Commons client for data retrieval. The test file has also been updated to reflect this change, using mocks instead of making actual API calls. The review comments suggest adding clarity to an empty dictionary in a download script, explaining test data in a test file, and removing an unused import.

I am having trouble creating individual review comments. Click here to see my feedback.

scripts/us_epa/parent_company/download_existing_facilities.py (45-46)

It would be helpful to add a comment explaining what the empty dictionary {} represents in this context. Is it a default value, or is it expected to be populated later?

scripts/us_epa/parent_company/download_existing_facilities_test.py (34-39)

The facility_nodes list contains a duplicate entry (epaGhgrpFacilityId/1001) and a None value. While the code handles these cases, it might be beneficial to add a comment explaining why these values are included in the test data. This will help future developers understand the purpose of these test cases.

scripts/us_epa/parent_company/download_existing_facilities_test.py (30-31)

The import of _V2_SPARQL_URL is no longer needed, and should be removed.

from scripts.us_epa.parent_company.download_existing_facilities import (
    download_existing_facilities,)