search

LSSTDESC / desc-exp-checker

Crowdsourced image quality control
MIT License
0 stars 2 forks source link

Naming releases #21

Closed kadrlica closed 5 years ago

kadrlica commented 6 years ago

According to @rmandelb's comments on slack, we should be calling these initial test images "Run 1.1" rather than "DC2".

kadrlica commented 6 years ago

I've been going with r1.1. I've avoided a p or i suffix because I think we may eventually want to mix phosim and imsim images (@katrinheitmann @jchaing is there a plan to have imsim runs for 1.1?). Mixing the two image simulation sets would give eyeballers a back-to-back comparison of images. There may be issues with unique naming (are we planning the same visits for the two runs?).

rmandelb commented 6 years ago

There will be a Run 1.1i according to the current plan. But it seems unlikely that we'd load Run 1.1p images into the exposure checker, since issues have already been identified. I imagine the first PhoSim run we'd want to have in there would be 1.2p.

kadrlica commented 6 years ago

The Run 1.1p exposures are already loaded into the dev version. I agree that for widespread circulation we will want to wait until the last moment.

kadrlica commented 6 years ago

One thing we might want to consider is a naming convention for the various test runs of r1.1p (i.e., edge30_34, etc.). These will never make it to the "production" version, but are useful to track in dev.

kadrlica commented 5 years ago

I think we've settled on r2.1i for the upcoming release. Generally (rN.N[i,p] seems to be a working nomenclature).