https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 8.3.4 803005 13-09-2019 https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/browse/INFRA-214 Software Development Infrastructure <p>/Following <a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/browse/INFRA-207" title="Create repo(s) for varying instrument characteristics" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="INFRA-207">INFRA-207</a>, please create a repository with the name <tt>pfs_instdata</tt> (or if it is more appropriate, <tt>ics_instdata</tt> following the naming conventions described in <a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/repos.html" class="external-link" rel="nofollow">https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/repos.html</a>).</p> <p>This would be used to store instrument characteristics files.</p> <ul> <li>Name of new repository : <tt>pfs_instdata</tt> or <tt>ics_instdata</tt></li> <li>Short description of new repository : storage of instrument characteristics files</li> <li>Responsible institution of the repository (coordination, development): Princeton University</li> <li>Corresponding JIRA project and component: INSTRM, new component</li> <li>License (OSS license is required; default to GPLv2): not applicable</li> </ul> INFRA-214

Create {{pfs_instdata}} repo for instrument characteristics

Task Major Done Done shimono hassan GitHub MCS SM1 Sat, 4 Aug 2018 15:13:35 +0000 Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:45:53 +0000 Wed, 12 Sep 2018 16:26:10 +0000 Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0900 0 3 <p>consumer listed in <a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/browse/INFRA-207" title="Create repo(s) for varying instrument characteristics" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="INFRA-207">INFRA-207</a> is not limited to ICS components, so it seems we can (or should?) put it in project wide resource (, no?). so I'd propose to use pfs_instdata...</p> <p><tt>pfs_instdata</tt> is fine with me.</p> <p>@shimono: when will this ticket be resolved? I see from PR #39 only a minor update to about.html is required. Is that correct?</p> <p><a href="https://github.com/Subaru-PFS/doc/blob/master/development-management/request.rst#add-new-github-repository" class="external-link" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/Subaru-PFS/doc/blob/master/development-management/request.rst#add-new-github-repository</a><br/> &gt; Once operation procedure finished, this ticket will be marked 'IN REVIEW' with a requestee as a reviewer <br/> &gt; by sysadmin, a requestee SHALL check new repository is working (like succeeded to push something, <br/> &gt; and to access repository admin panel) and mark as 'DONE', but a requestee does not need to check PR <br/> &gt; for public web site (etc.).</p> <p>Ok, but the same link mentions:</p> <blockquote><p>3. Add a line of new repository to repos.html and about.html, with a PR branch named as the repository creation ticket and sysadmin as reviewer (not a requestee). Just merge if updated website is fine.</p></blockquote> <p>and</p> <blockquote><p>Once operation procedure finished <span class="error">&#91;...&#93;</span></p></blockquote> <p>So given that the branch has not been merged yet, I presumed that the ticket was marked as 'in review' a little early.</p> <p>But in any case I see that the html updates are independent of a GitHub repository review so will arrange for that to happen.</p> <p>I could NOT see the latter part.<br/> it says explicitly<br/> &gt; Also, sysadmin SHALL work on 'pfs_www_pipe' PR independently.</p> <p>I don't understand by your first sentence </p> <blockquote><p>I could NOT see the latter part.</p></blockquote> <blockquote><p></p></blockquote> <p>But regarding your second point:</p> <blockquote><p>it says explicitly</p></blockquote> <blockquote><p>&gt; Also, sysadmin SHALL work on 'pfs_www_pipe' PR independently.</p></blockquote> <blockquote><p></p></blockquote> <p>I had also seen that sentence. But it appears to contradict the previous sentence (that I partly quoted in my above comment). So I suggest the text in that section should be made more clear.</p> <p>As I have mentioned already, I will arrange the testing of the GitHub repo independently in any case. </p> <p>ah, I found it in the requestee part as <br/> &gt; Once operation procedure finished, this ticket will be marked 'IN REVIEW' with a requestee as a reviewer by sysadmin,<br/> which has been finished as marking 'IN REVIEW'.</p> <p>Ok. I've not wrote procedure in clear way, following Naoyuki's direction that we shall keep procedure as smooth/unclear/floating one, but I'll try to make things as clear as possible like normal OSS way. let me have some time to work on it.</p> <p><a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=cloomis" class="user-hover" rel="cloomis">cloomis</a> Can you test the repo please?</p> <p>Simple tests performed (add new file, commit, push; delete file, commit, push) on new git repo. All OK. </p> <p>As PR #39 has been merged, ticket can now be resolved.</p> <p><a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=atsushi.shimono" class="user-hover" rel="atsushi.shimono">shimono</a> or <a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=yuki.moritani" class="user-hover" rel="yuki.moritani">yuki.moritani</a>: can we resolve this issue now?</p> <p><a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=hassan" class="user-hover" rel="hassan">hassan</a> I'm sorry ... I couldn't understand your point exactly.</p> <ul> <li>Atsushi already created the repogitory: <a href="https://github.com/Subaru-PFS/pfs_instdata" class="external-link" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/Subaru-PFS/pfs_instdata</a></li> <li>You tested it and found no problem (I think)</li> </ul> <p>So I think the reporter (I'm afraid you, Hassan, this time) can change the status as "done".</p> <p>I understand now. I apologize - I am very used to the assignee or JIRA project custodian resolving issues in general.<br/> Will resolve.</p> <p>Repo created and tested OK.</p> Blocks INFRA-207 Development Epic Link INSTRM-398 Rank 0|s000bs: Reviewers hassan