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

Merry christmas david fisher! #906

Merged
merged 37 commits into from
Jan 2, 2024
Merged

Merry christmas david fisher! #906

merged 37 commits into from
Jan 2, 2024

Conversation

epugh
Copy link
Member

@epugh epugh commented Dec 6, 2023

Description

Use ActiveJob to register that we want to update any cases related to a specific judgement (via a book releationship) to have update ratings.

Motivation and Context

See #829 for why.

This is also a "practice" round for understanding how well does ActiveJob work for us in Quepid-land.....

How Has This Been Tested?

Added a test. Now using manually during rating to see...

Screenshots or GIFs (if appropriate):

Types of changes

  • [] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Improvement (non-breaking change which improves existing functionality)
  • [] New feature (non-breaking change which adds new functionality)
  • [] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • [] My code follows the code style of this project.
  • [] My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • [] I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • [] I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • [] I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • [] All new and existing tests passed.

@epugh epugh linked an issue Dec 6, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@epugh epugh linked an issue Dec 11, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@epugh epugh linked an issue Dec 13, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@epugh
Copy link
Member Author

epugh commented Dec 16, 2023

This PR is growing happily out of control.... Going to merge it and get it to app.quepid.com soon!

@epugh
Copy link
Member Author

epugh commented Dec 22, 2023

Ugh... discovered, that if you create missing queries from a book, you lose the info need, or any qOptions.. I think a query object and a query_doc_pair need parity...

…eserving all query attributes on query_doc_pairs
@epugh
Copy link
Member Author

epugh commented Dec 29, 2023

Draft PR notes:

This one got away from me!  In this one PR we have some nice improvements in the lifecycle of books and cases:

1. Now when you judge a query doc pair for a book we update in the background any associated Cases.  This eliminates the need to manually refresh the case ratings from the book!   

1. Band-aid the awkwardness that Cases have Queries/Ratings while Books have QueryDocPairs + Judgements, and that there are attributes on a Query like information need, notes, or options that don't exist on a QueryDocPair.   So now we preserve them, which faciliates round tripping better.   Upload a Book?  Upload a Case?  It doesn't mattern ;-)  Long term we need to merge these two data structures...   

1. When books were first created, they didn't follow the same permissions/sharing structure that Scores and Cases did.  Now you can share a Book with multiple Teams!

1. And as an aside, anyone can edit a custom scorer, not just the Owner of it.  

@epugh epugh merged commit 247e7c7 into main Jan 2, 2024
2 of 4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants