DM-39005: Restructure analysis tools docs landing page. #87
Conversation
leeskelvin
force-pushed
the
tickets/DM-39005
branch
5 times, most recently
from
2fc3a4a
to
f320cbf
Compare
| You can find Jira issues for this module under the `analysis_tools <https://jira.lsstcorp.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20DM%20AND%20component%20%3D%20analysis_tools>`_ component. | ||
|
|
||
| .. If there are topics related to developing this module (rather than using it), link to this from a toctree placed here. | ||
| If you have any questions regarding ``analysis_tools`` it is recommended that you post your question on `The Community Forum <https://community.lsst.org/>`_. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just wanted to check that this was agreed on. Is someone assigned to look out for questions on Community, or do we expect that someone outside DRP is going to forward questions to us?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My understanding is that the official line is to always redirect questions from the community onto Community. Slack is convenient, but also seen as a transient resource (i.e., not good for long-term information storage). Happy to punt on this one however if you would like to bring it up for a broader discussion?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Update from Yusra via Slack:
We can only direct staff to Slack. Your commissioning in-kinds are considered staff, so if you’re talking about comms to them in particular, you can direct them to Slack. But if this is going on the pipelines.lsst.io, you need to only direct them to community. That’s our only official user support.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removed the Slack component, and leaving Community here in this section accordingly.
| There are two types of primary tools within this package; `AnalysisMetrics | ||
| and `AnalysisPlots`, both of which are specialized subclasses of `AnalysisTool`. | ||
| There are two primary types of tools within this package: `AnalysisMetrics` and | ||
| `AnalysisPlots`, both of which are specialized subclasses of `AnalysisTool`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is AnalysisTool now, so this should be rewritten.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed to (and merged with the next paragraph):
The primary tool in this package is the
AnalysisToolclass.
AnAnalysisToolclass has three stages: prep, process, and produce.
Creating a newAnalysisToolinvolves choosing (through
configuration) anAnalysisActionto run for each of those stages.
| configuration) what `AnalysisAction` will run for each of those stages. | ||
| An `AnalysisTool` object has three stages: prep, process, and produce. | ||
| Creating a new `AnalysisTool` involves choosing (through | ||
| configuration) an `AnalysisAction` to run for each of those stages. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since you can use multiple actions for each stage, how about "which AnalysisActions to run..."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Modified the final sentence to read:
Creating a new
AnalysisToolinvolves choosing (through configuration) one or
moreAnalysisActionclasses to run for each of those stages.
leeskelvin
force-pushed
the
tickets/DM-39005
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b7b6b06
to
ccaf6a9
Compare
leeskelvin
force-pushed
the
tickets/DM-39005
branch
from
ccaf6a9
to
203941e
Compare
|
Replies:
I think this was a transient thing in the testing docs I built. I played around a few times, regenerating them, and they seem to work fine now. I'll keep an eye on this in the built docs to make sure all is well.
No, they were not, thank you for catching that. They've been added back in by adding the :include-all-objects: option under the primary automodapi directive 👍 |
No description provided.