Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-22952

Add support of dcr coadds to ImageDifferenceTask in gen3 mode

    Details

    • Story Points:
      4
    • Sprint:
      AP S20-4 (March), AP S20-5 (April)
    • Team:
      Alert Production
    • Urgent?:
      No

      Description

      This ticket is introduced as code TODO by DM-22541.

       

      Add support for dcr coadd template loading to ImageDifferenceTask in gen3 mode. Perhaps instead of GetCoaddAsTemplateConfig.coaddName we want a top level config option e.g. useDcr that controls the inputs in the connection class.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            gkovacs Gabor Kovacs added a comment -

            It looks all right.

            • sensorRef now remains in use for both dcr and deep coadds in GetCoaddAsTemplateTask.run() until Gen 2 retires...
            • Please remove "TODO DM-22952" from GetCoaddAsTemplateTask.run() docstring.
            • I have 1 comment on GitHub for ip_diffim.
            Show
            gkovacs Gabor Kovacs added a comment - It looks all right. sensorRef now remains in use for both dcr and deep coadds in  GetCoaddAsTemplateTask.run() until Gen 2 retires... Please remove "TODO DM-22952 " from GetCoaddAsTemplateTask.run() docstring. I have 1 comment on GitHub for ip_diffim.
            Hide
            sullivan Ian Sullivan added a comment -

            Gabor Kovacs I made your requested change in ip_diffim. Was there anything else you wanted to see changed? If not, could you mark the pull request as 'approved'?

            Show
            sullivan Ian Sullivan added a comment - Gabor Kovacs I made your requested change in ip_diffim . Was there anything else you wanted to see changed? If not, could you mark the pull request as 'approved'?
            Hide
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - - edited

            (Just by the way, since I saw a comment like this a couple of times in the last few days — our process doesn't actually require marking PRs reviewed on GitHub. I've no objection to people doing this if they find it helpful, but best not to expect that people will do it as a matter of course.)

            Show
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - - edited (Just by the way, since I saw a comment like this a couple of times in the last few days —  our process doesn't actually require marking PRs reviewed on GitHub. I've no objection to people doing this if they find it helpful, but best not to expect that people will do it as a matter of course.)
            Hide
            sullivan Ian Sullivan added a comment -

            Fair enough. I like to see everything "approved" before merging as a check to make sure I'm on the same page as the reviewer, but I understand it's not strictly necessary.

            Show
            sullivan Ian Sullivan added a comment - Fair enough. I like to see everything "approved" before merging as a check to make sure I'm on the same page as the reviewer, but I understand it's not strictly necessary.
            Hide
            gkovacs Gabor Kovacs added a comment - - edited

            John Swinbank, thanks for the procedure reminder. Re ip_diffim on GitHub, I was actually unsure what to click or not to click; I think I clicked "comment only" that somehow actually closed the "in review" status there.

             

            Of course, I meant to approve the merge.

            Show
            gkovacs Gabor Kovacs added a comment - - edited John Swinbank , thanks for the procedure reminder. Re ip_diffim on GitHub, I was actually unsure what to click or not to click; I think I clicked "comment only" that somehow actually closed the "in review" status there.   Of course, I meant to approve the merge.

              People

              • Assignee:
                sullivan Ian Sullivan
                Reporter:
                gkovacs Gabor Kovacs
                Reviewers:
                Gabor Kovacs
                Watchers:
                Gabor Kovacs, Ian Sullivan, John Swinbank
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                3 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved: