-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Rewrite database description document #9
Comments
Comments from email mentioned above are as follows: I think this is a good start. I think what this particularly needs now is an introduction explaining why this is needed, what it is replacing, etc., and also pointers to what comes next. The descriptions of the tables and fields need expanding a bit - I think you should be able to understand every single field in the database using this document. I think we also need, either in this document, or as a separate document, details of the source data for this, how it is populated, etc. Specifically I would suggest:
|
@magnusmanske , could you talk to @sclaugoncalves to understand what the different library IDs available are, and ensure that the ones that get included in FITS are documented here? Also, note that @alimanfoo has suggested (#6) using markdown for documentation, which I think is a good idea. |
I have ported the Google doc over to markdown, here. I will incorporate some of the above suggestions. Note, however, that this is the database description document. It is not "FITS MVP", or FITS in general. It describes the database, not the philosophic rationale of having a file tracking system. |
Yes, fair point. However, I think the comments above should be captured somewhere in the documentation. If you think this is not the right place, could you decide where is and document there? |
The document is now here |
In the following could you:
Comments on this document (note some of these were previously in the comment dated Sep 28 and they haven't been addressed in the latest version): "It does not describe FITS in total". But we need this overview somewhere, right? Could you
|
We already have "overview" and "mvp_v1" for, well, an overview. I have linked to those now. I don't see the point in Yet Another Document to duplicate that information. I have added some field information to the SQL schema itself, where it does not appear relevant for the main document. I would rather not add the database access details into a git doc/issue. That's just bad form. |
I'm not sure we need guidelines for the notes. They are, by definition, free-form. My guideline recommendation is "use common sense". |
Sorry, I think I forgot there was already an overview document when writing this. The new links go to raw .md file rather than correctly rendered version - could this be fixed?
OK, what might be useful is an example of how to access this information from the schema itself
Fair point. How about including the details with the exception of the password and have a note saying "contact @magnusmanske for password" or similar? |
With this commit, I consider all points here addressed, and close the issue. |
@magnusmanske - I've just made a pull request with a few suggested small changes. I also have a few follow on questions:
Please address the above by making pull requests, and outlining answers to each of the above (including question number) either in the pull request comments, or else as comments in this issue. This issue should be left open until we have sign-off, i.e. agreement at a production meeting that this is good to go. |
based on previous comments from Richard in email 28/06/2018 13:59
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: