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

Making Schema consistent with Topic names #115

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 2, 2023

Conversation

Vidushi-GitHub
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@Vidushi-GitHub
Copy link
Member Author

Following nasa-gcn/gcn.nasa.gov#1539

@lpsinger
Copy link
Member

lpsinger commented Oct 18, 2023

@Vidushi-GitHub, would you please prepare a PR for the web site to update the naming conventions?

Also, should we change the names of the core schema to match?

@Vidushi-GitHub
Copy link
Member Author

Vidushi-GitHub commented Oct 18, 2023

@Vidushi-GitHub, would you please prepare a PR for the web site to update the naming conventions?

Also, should we change the names of the core schema to match?

Changing the core-schema isn't necessary, we can keep basic/team ones as CamelCase. Whereas, producers ones as underscore, lowercase? The document only talk about naming convention for producers and can be modified.

@blaufuss
Copy link
Contributor

This is fine with IceCube. We would need to make sure we change our production notices for the LVK followup notices to match the new schema name, but can make a coordinated change once this is ready to go into production.

The move of the Gold/Bronze stuff to test/ was on purpose? Once we get ready to produce these, we need to make a PR to move? Thanks

@Vidushi-GitHub
Copy link
Member Author

Vidushi-GitHub commented Oct 18, 2023

The move of the Gold/Bronze stuff to test/ was on purpose? Once we get ready to produce these, we need to make a PR to move? Thanks

Although it's not in production, topic is already created as gcn.notices.icecube.test.gold_bronze_track_alerts and schema should have same structure. If you want please let's us know the modification in topic name for this one, that will be followed for schema name.

@blaufuss
Copy link
Contributor

The move of the Gold/Bronze stuff to test/ was on purpose? Once we get ready to produce these, we need to make a PR to move? Thanks

Although it's not in production, topic is already created as gcn.notices.icecube.test.gold_bronze_track_alerts and schema should have same structure. If you want please let's us know the modification in topic name for this one, that will be followed for schema name.

I understand the renaming to match the topic name, this is fine. I also note the files here are moved to a ./test/ directory as part of this PR. That's an intentional move? It's fine if so, once we finish preparing it for production we can make a PR to move out of test...

@Vidushi-GitHub
Copy link
Member Author

Vidushi-GitHub commented Oct 19, 2023

I understand the renaming to match the topic name, this is fine. I also note the files here are moved to a ./test/ directory as part of this PR. That's an intentional move? It's fine if so, once we finish preparing it for production we can make a PR to move out of test...

If you go to issue: nasa-gcn/gcn.nasa.gov#1539, gold/bronze has existing topic name as; gcn.notices.icecube.test.gold_bronze_track_alerts, which implies gcn/notices/icecube/test/ directory structure.
If topic name is fixed, the directory structure wouldn't have extra /test/.

@Vidushi-GitHub
Copy link
Member Author

Vidushi-GitHub commented Oct 19, 2023

@Vidushi-GitHub, would you please prepare a PR for the web site to update the naming conventions?

Please see PR#1540 for web site update.

dakota002 added a commit to dakota002/gcn.nasa.gov that referenced this pull request Oct 26, 2023
@lpsinger lpsinger merged commit 8a1be7a into nasa-gcn:main Nov 2, 2023
1 check passed
@Vidushi-GitHub Vidushi-GitHub deleted the Topics/Schema branch December 29, 2023 00:58
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.

3 participants