DM-30342: Add missing detect flags to object table #10
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
yalsayyad
reviewed
May 26, 2021
jeffcarlin
reviewed
May 26, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but it looks like each of the flags needs to be defined per band (e.g., gPsfFlux_flag and iPsfFlux_flag). Or, if they come from the deepCoadd_ref catalog, do they need "ref" appended at the beginning (a la refExtendedness)? You may need to confirm this with @yalsayyad.
|
Because these flags are defined from the reference catalog (under "refFlags" in the Object.yaml) these do not get exploded out per band: https://github.com/lsst/obs_subaru/blob/master/policy/Object.yaml#L315 Fred did it right. |
yalsayyad
force-pushed
the
tickets/DM-30342
branch
from
bd160bf
to
463e7de
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.