[INSTRM-648] agreeing on dcbActor instance name Created: 11/Apr/19 Updated: 13/Apr/19 Resolved: 13/Apr/19 |
|
| Status: | Done |
| Project: | Instrument control development |
| Component/s: | ics_ccdActor |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Normal |
| Reporter: | arnaud.lefur | Assignee: | cloomis |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | SM1 | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| Sprint: | SM1-2019 E | ||||||||
| Description |
|
We need to agree on dcbActor instance name. ccdActor is expecting dcb_%(specName)s, but it always has been named dcb here. For that reason, some data taken recently has header issues ( eg W_PFDSGN is missing ...) I'm not against dcb_%(specName)s, but i'm not sure to see what are we gaining. |
| Comments |
| Comment by cloomis [ 13/Apr/19 ] |
|
For LAM, dcb is clearly fine. And I now understand there will also only be one at Subaru. So dcb it should be. If that is what the name has been at LAM, I'll use this ticket to modify ics_ccdActor. |
| Comment by cloomis [ 13/Apr/19 ] |
|
Merged at 5cf95ed, tagged 1.3.11 |