Stuck on an issue?
Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
dvc add output
See original GitHub issueIn dvc run you can specify dvc-file name. Why don’t we create a similar option for dvc add?
$ dvc add file.zip -f Dvcfile
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 5 years ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:10 (8 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
stage add | Data Version Control - DVC
Stage dependencies can be any file or directory, either untracked, or more commonly tracked by DVC or Git. Outputs will be tracked and...
Read more >add | Data Version Control - DVC
add. Track data files or directories with DVC, by creating a corresponding .dvc file. ... This is a standard .dvc file with only...
Read more >dvc.yaml Files | Data Version Control
If it writes files or directories, these can be defined as outputsoutputs ( outs ). DVC will track them going forward (similar to...
Read more >.dvc Files | Data Version Control · DVC
.dvc Files. You can use dvc add to track data files or directories located in your current workspaceworkspace*. Additionally, dvc import and dvc...
Read more >Dvc external output add after changing files data in remote is ...
I know that, after changing data being tracked by dvc, we can use “dvc add” command and then “dvc push” to github. I...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Like raise an exception if multiple targets are specified? I’m fine with this option. I would probably deprecate multiple targets anyway in the future. Just don’t see any reasons to complicate the logic.
Or, we could simply not support
-fwith multiple targets. Backward compatibility will not be affected and we will support the target feature 🎉