Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-41664

Rename prompt_prototype package and containers

    XMLWordPrintable

Details

    Description

      Begin implementing RFC-972 by renaming the prompt_prototype package to prompt_processing per DMTN-027, updating code/doc references accordingly, and removing the -proto- infix from container names. Update the Phalanx config to use the new container names, but do not attempt any other renaming within Phalanx.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment - - edited

            Some discussion with Parejkoj:

            • The procedure in DMTN-027 involves forking the package to another team, then carefully juggling the packages so that the two copies are never in the same place (I assume GitHub will choke on two forks having the same owner?). This is problematic in our case because we want the "active" package to be in lsst-dm, and don't have a good place for the archival copy.
            • According to Parejkoj, the motivation for the forking is so that lsst_distrib doesn't break while we're in the process of renaming the package and adding the new package name to repos.yaml. Since we're not part of lsst_distrib, that problem doesn't apply to us.
            • GitHub's redirects should take care of other references to the old package name, including working copies.

            Therefore, I will follow a modified version of DMTN-027 that does the package rename in place, but still follows the remaining parts of the procedure (commit patterns, repos.yaml, documentation, etc.).

            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment - - edited Some discussion with Parejkoj : The procedure in DMTN-027 involves forking the package to another team, then carefully juggling the packages so that the two copies are never in the same place (I assume GitHub will choke on two forks having the same owner?). This is problematic in our case because we want the "active" package to be in lsst-dm , and don't have a good place for the archival copy. According to Parejkoj , the motivation for the forking is so that lsst_distrib doesn't break while we're in the process of renaming the package and adding the new package name to repos.yaml . Since we're not part of lsst_distrib , that problem doesn't apply to us. GitHub's redirects should take care of other references to the old package name, including working copies. Therefore, I will follow a modified version of DMTN-027 that does the package rename in place, but still follows the remaining parts of the procedure (commit patterns, repos.yaml , documentation, etc.).

            Thanks for agreeing to look at this, hchiang2!

            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment - Thanks for agreeing to look at this, hchiang2 !

            Looks like the GitHub repo and Jira component renaming have been done seamlessly. The two PRs both look good to me.

            hchiang2 Hsin-Fang Chiang added a comment - Looks like the GitHub repo and Jira component renaming have been done seamlessly. The two PRs both look good to me.

            People

              krzys Krzysztof Findeisen
              krzys Krzysztof Findeisen
              Hsin-Fang Chiang
              Hsin-Fang Chiang, Ian Sullivan, Krzysztof Findeisen
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              3 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Jenkins

                  No builds found.