-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Create gradations in who joins scenario migrations #1362
Comments
One question @noracato. Shouldn't we discuss removing the '1 month migration criterium' anyway? Even without picking up this issue and possibly quintel/etmodel#4146. Is this something to discuss in the teammeeting? |
A possible addition to this idea could be to split the
|
This issue has had no activity for 60 days and will be closed in 7 days. Removing the "Stale" label or posting a comment will prevent it from being closed automatically. You can also add the "Pinned" label to ensure it isn't marked as stale in the future. |
This issue has had no activity for 60 days and will be closed in 7 days. Removing the "Stale" label or posting a comment will prevent it from being closed automatically. You can also add the "Pinned" label to ensure it isn't marked as stale in the future. |
Currently we migrate scenarios under the following criteria: either they have
keep_compatible
set to true, or they have to be created within the last month. However, we find that some users do not want their scenarios to join every migration, but only the really necessary ones. Hence we can think about creating a gradation in compatibility settings.We can classify all migrations under the two following concepts:
necessary
Renaming of sliders, changing of units
helpful
Approximation of new slider value based on scenario after changes in modelling
Instead of having only the options
true
orfalse
forkeep_compatible
we could offer three options instead. A consequence is that scenario owners are more aware of compatibility options, and thus we should remove the '1 month old' migration criterium when we implement this.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: