Iron out association asset names

[bendnorman]

@zaneselvans suggested we alphabetize multiple source names when they appear in an asset name. I went through all of our association tables and realized we not super consistent with how we name these types of assets:

• Association assets that link multiple sources and need to be alphabetized
  • core_epa__assn_epacamd_eia
  • core_epa__assn_epacamd_eia_subplant_ids
  • core_pudl__assn_raw_epacamd_eia
  • _core_epa__assn_epacamd_eia_unique
• Mostly our association assets follow this naming convention {layer}_{source of association asset}__assn_{datasets being linked}_{entity being linked}. However, we aren't consistent about the order of {datasets being linked} and {entity being linked}. For example:
  • core_pudl__assn_plants_eia
  • core_pudl__assn_plants_ferc1
  • core_pudl__assn_utilities_eia
  • core_pudl__assn_utilities_ferc1
  • core_pudl__assn_utilities_ferc1_dbf
  • core_pudl__assn_utilities_ferc1_xbrl
• I found one association asset that still has assn at the end of the asset name.
  • core_eia860__yearly_boiler_emissions_control_equipment_assn

I propose we rename these assets to follow this convention: {layer}_{source of association asset}__assn_{datasets being linked}_{entity being linked}

Tasks

Beta Give feedback

1. core_epa__assn_epacamd_eia -> core_epa__assn_eia_epacamd
2. core_epa__assn_epacamd_eia_subplant_ids -> core_epa__assn_eia_epacamd_subplant_ids
3. raw_epacamd_eia -> raw_pudl__assn_eia_epacamd (i actually don't were the raw should be here)
4. _core_epa__assn_epacamd_eia_unique -> _core_epa__assn_eia_epacamd_unique
5. core_pudl__assn_plants_eia -> core_pudl__assn_eia_pudl_plants (assuming pudl is also a dataset here & below)
6. core_pudl__assn_plants_ferc1 -> core_pudl__assn_ferc1_pudl_plants
7. core_pudl__assn_utilities_eia -> core_pudl__assn_eia_pudl_utilities
8. core_pudl__assn_utilities_ferc1 -> core_pudl__assn_ferc1_pudl_utilities
9. core_pudl__assn_utilities_ferc1_dbf -> core_pudl__assn_ferc1_dbf_pudl_utilities (assuming ferc1_dbf is considered a dataset)
10. core_pudl__assn_utilities_ferc1_xbrl -> core_pudl__assn_ferc1_xbrl_pudl_utilities
11. core_eia860__yearly_boiler_emissions_control_equipment_assn -> core_eia860__assn_yearly_boiler_emissions_control_equipment
12. Explain how to name assn tables in the docs
13. Create migrations, Run local ETL

[cmgosnell]

I propose we rename these assets to follow this convention: {layer}{source of association asset}_assn{datasets being linked}{entity being linked}

I think this is the way!! which does - somewhat annoyingly- mean that we will have some instances where the source dataset is also included in the datasets being linked. but i think that is okay and will make everything more consistent!!

[cmgosnell]

Which i thiiiink would mean this:

• core_epa__assn_eia_epacamd
• core_epa__assn_eia_epacamd_subplant_ids
• core_pudl__assn_raw_eia_epacamd (i actually don't were the raw should be here)
• _core_epa__assn_epacamd_eia_unique
• core_pudl__assn_eia_pudl_plants (assuming pudl is also a dataset here & below)
• core_pudl__assn_ferc1_eia_plants
• core_pudl__assn_eia_pudl_utilities
• core_pudl__assn_ferc1_pudl_utilities
• core_pudl__assn_ferc1_dbf_pudl_utilities (assuming ferc1_dbf is considered a dataset)
• core_pudl__assn_ferc1_xbrl_pudl_utilities

If the assn is within one dataset should it still get the {datasets being linked}:

• core_eia860__assn_yearly_eia860_boiler_emissions_control_equipment
• OR just core_eia860__assn_yearly_eia860_boiler_emissions_control_equipment

[bendnorman]

These look good to me! I think if the assn is within one dataset we shouldn't include {datasets being linked} just so there isn't too much duplication. So boiler emissions would be core_eia860__assn_yearly_boiler_emissions_control_equipment

[bendnorman]

Closed by #3035