Details
-
Type:
RFC
-
Status: Implemented
-
Resolution: Done
-
Component/s: DM
-
Labels:None
Description
We need to have two dataset names for coadd images: one for the raw coadd produced by assembleCoadd.py, and one for the background-subtracted coadd with detections identified produced by detectCoaddSources.py. The first is deepCoadd in both LSST and HSC, and is not in contention. The second is deepCoadd_calexp_det in LSST and deepCoadd_calexp in HSC. I think the LSST name originates from before HSC transitioned to a naming scheme that I think makes sense, and hence I think it's a bit confused, and unnecessarily long and clumsy. I would like to make the LSST naming scheme consistent with that of HSC because I think it's simpler, clearer, and more people have more experience with it. deepCoadd_calexp currently appears to be unused on the LSST side.
Now seems to be a good time to do this, before the multiband products become more widely used on the LSST side. The HSC port ticket DM-5288 will do this work, including updating dataset names in the obs_* packages.
Attachments
Issue Links
- blocks
-
- Done
Activity
Paul Price
added a comment - Yes, you're quite right. There's overlap between DM-5322 and DM-5288 . On whichever ticket the work is done, there's code that needs to come over from HSC for it. I hadn't realised that the DM-5322 work needed further input from HSC. If you think it's better to handle part or all of that work as part of DM-5288, that works for me.
I'd been intending to go ahead with renaming the dataset without RFCing it, on the basis that it was implicit in the previous RFCed plan for the multiband transition. However, since you are doing things by the book (
), it's a strong +1 from me on this.
Definitely a good idea. +1
Adopted as written.
Paul Price
added a comment - Adopted as written. Paul Price
added a comment - Implemented as part of DM-5288 .
DM-5322 was recast to simply remove duplicate or unused datasets. 
I think this work is actually already scheduled as part of
DM-5322: it's just been waiting forDM-4692to land before we act on it. Does that story address your point, or am I misunderstanding what you're driving at?