[DAMD-49] Clarify use of expId Created: 04/Apr/19 Updated: 11/Jun/19 Resolved: 24/May/19 |
|
| Status: | Done |
| Project: | Data Model |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Story | Priority: | Normal |
| Reporter: | hassan | Assignee: | price |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
This ticket has been separated out from The concept of expId had been introduced as part of
|
| Comments |
| Comment by price [ 25/Apr/19 ] |
|
Craig and I thought expId would be preferable (visit is an LSST-ism), so I tried to replace visit with expId but found that visit is hard-wired in the LSST Butler in places. Hopefully it won’t be in the next version of the butler, but that’s a while away. I don't care either way, and suggest we just go with visit (at least in the pipeline; the instrument software shouldn't care what the pipeline calls it). |
| Comment by cloomis [ 25/Apr/19 ] |
|
+1 on visit – it is time to choose one term and to use it consistently. Including the instrument software. |
| Comment by hassan [ 26/Apr/19 ] |
|
Following 2D DRP tech telecon earlier today - agreed to replace expId with visit. Some technical details (use of expId and visit) in certain calls) to be discussed between price and hassan. |
| Comment by hassan [ 07/May/19 ] |
|
Additionally, replace expHash with pfsVisitHash . |
| Comment by hassan [ 24/May/19 ] |
|
Merged to master (commit 457f484). |