[INFRA-266] Create obs_pfs_data on GitHub Created: 31/Oct/19 Updated: 08/Nov/19 Resolved: 08/Nov/19 |
|
| Status: | Done |
| Project: | Software Development Infrastructure |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Story | Priority: | Normal |
| Reporter: | price | Assignee: | yuki.moritani |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Reviewers: | price |
| Description |
|
We need a git LFS repo to hold version-controlled data for use in the 2D pipeline, such as defects, PSFs, etc. Following the LSST naming convention, this should be called obs_pfs_data.
|
| Comments |
| Comment by yuki.moritani [ 31/Oct/19 ] |
|
Well, I'm afraid PFS also have naming convention https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/repos.html ( obs_pfs is an exception, I think.) Is it OK to name the drp_pfs_data ? hassan , could you please comment on that? |
| Comment by price [ 31/Oct/19 ] |
|
My concern with the name was that perhaps the LSST code relies on their naming scheme. However, I've checked with them and they believe that a different naming scheme shouldn't break anything (and if it does, "it deserves to be broken"), so I'm fine with the alternative name you suggest. Thanks! |
| Comment by yuki.moritani [ 31/Oct/19 ] |
|
I appreciate your consideration. I'm happy to hear that you won't have a problem with the proposed name. I've created the repository : https://github.com/Subaru-PFS/drp_pfs_data If you succeed in pushing the first commit, please close this ticket. |
| Comment by price [ 08/Nov/19 ] |
|
This works, thanks! |