Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Integrate CP-ITI-1253-06 #186

Merged
merged 20 commits into from Jun 1, 2022
Merged

Integrate CP-ITI-1253-06 #186

merged 20 commits into from Jun 1, 2022

Conversation

lynnfel
Copy link
Contributor

@lynnfel lynnfel commented May 15, 2022

Vol 3 CP 1253 integration ready for you to review.

@JohnMoehrke
Copy link
Contributor

looks good to me.

@lynnfel lynnfel changed the base branch from master to ITI-CP-Integration May 16, 2022 15:21
@slagesse-epic slagesse-epic self-requested a review May 24, 2022 01:19
Copy link
Member

@slagesse-epic slagesse-epic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks like CP-ITI-1270 was not properly integrated in #143 . DocumentEntry.patientId should link to section 4.2.3.2.16 rather than 4.2.3.1.16, and DocumentEntry.uniqueId should link to section 4.2.3.2..26 rather than 4.2.3.1.26.

Should we fix that in this branch?

@slagesse-epic slagesse-epic removed their assignment May 24, 2022
@JohnMoehrke
Copy link
Contributor

It looks like CP-ITI-1270 was not properly integrated in #143 . DocumentEntry.patientId should link to section 4.2.3.2.16 rather than 4.2.3.1.16, and DocumentEntry.uniqueId should link to section 4.2.3.2..26 rather than 4.2.3.1.26.

Should we fix that in this branch?

this should be fixed in a different PR specific to #143 (which is not yet closed)

@JohnMoehrke
Copy link
Contributor

It looks like CP-ITI-1270 was not properly integrated in #143 . DocumentEntry.patientId should link to section 4.2.3.2.16 rather than 4.2.3.1.16, and DocumentEntry.uniqueId should link to section 4.2.3.2..26 rather than 4.2.3.1.26.
Should we fix that in this branch?

this should be fixed in a different PR specific to #143 (which is not yet closed)

this appears to have been fixed in PR 143

@JohnMoehrke
Copy link
Contributor

this should be ready to merge. right?

@lynnfel
Copy link
Contributor Author

lynnfel commented Jun 1, 2022

Yes, I think this is ready to merge

@JohnMoehrke JohnMoehrke merged commit c3f73f5 into ITI-CP-Integration Jun 1, 2022
@JohnMoehrke JohnMoehrke deleted the Vol3-Ch4.1-CPs branch June 1, 2022 17:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants