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

Views to include #2

Open
vsoch opened this issue Dec 14, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Views to include #2

vsoch opened this issue Dec 14, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@vsoch
Copy link
Collaborator

vsoch commented Dec 14, 2020

hey @fgypas I started working on changes to panoptes today, and realized that I missed some endpoints! E.g., those in the api.py:

/api/workflows
/api/workflow/<workflow_id>
/api/workflow/<workflow_id>/jobs
/api/workflow<workflow_id>/job/<job_id>

And then there are several in app.py - these look specific to panoptes (e.g., /workflows/ shows all workflows) and shouldn't be part of the spec, but before I start working on this I want to make sure that we discuss those to be included (of the above and others that are around that I might have missed!)

@fgypas
Copy link
Member

fgypas commented Dec 14, 2020

Hi @vsoch

Thanks for looking into this. Something that is important and I am not sure how clear we mention in the documentation is to start working from develop and not master. We use master only to make releases.

Here are all the existing API endpoints:
https://github.com/panoptes-organization/panoptes/tree/develop#panoptes-api

The ones in the second table are the ones we discussed, as they are related to the communication with snakemake. The rest are related to panoptes, but we can also improve/standardize them if you wish.

What's your opinion?

@vsoch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

vsoch commented Dec 14, 2020

Oh oops, that was my mistake! I thought the file looked different than the one you linked but didn't think about why.

It looks like the only endpoint detail I need to add is the one for job detail, and the rest are generally represented with /m1/ replacing /api/. This should be enough for me to get started again (likely tomorrow). Thanks for the quick response, and I'll leave the issue open in case further discussion is warranted when I start working!

@fgypas
Copy link
Member

fgypas commented Dec 15, 2020

@vsoch sorry if you wasted time on it. I should have mentioned this earlier.
Yes, I agree, changing /api/ to /m1/ would do the trick.

@vsoch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

vsoch commented Dec 15, 2020

Oh no wasted time at all! I want to make sure that I get all of them, that's all :)

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants