Open PondiB opened 1 year ago
Not a big fan of the
_component
suffix, otherwise just added a couple of minor comments to clean-up the descriptions. Overall very solid proposals, I think.
Okay
Has this been tested against common date-time libraries, especially the ones that are mentioned in the implementation guide? It would be good to know whether all the edge cases have been found, documented and been tested with at least the 4 libraries mentioned there (this is the reason for the change request).
Not really. What implementation guide?
What implementation guide?
https://github.com/Open-EO/openeo-processes/blob/master/meta/implementation.md
Not a big fan of the _component suffix,
You're not a fan of _component
as a suffix, or any suffix at all? Do you have other suggestions?
You're not a fan of
_component
as a suffix, or any suffix at all? Do you have other suggestions?
date_get and date_replace seem fine to me, but I'm not the dictator so if many prefer the _component suffix, I'm fine with it. I don't have a good alternative at hand (maybe "part"), I also don't think we hve anything comparable right now, which we can borrow from.
the closest comparable process is array_element
I think, so date_element
could make sense too
date_replace_component and date_get_component is more intuitive to me than date_replace, date_get and date_element.
@m-mohr , if there is no further review of this then kindly approve.
@soxofaan 👆🏾
no further remarks from me, we already iterated enough on this on I guess :)
Sure, thanks.
@PondiB You did never followed-up on the comment with regards to extending the implementation guide. Any updates on that?
Did a quick review. See comments above. Also, the implementation guide on what libraries support exactly this should be added (compare to the other date processes).
Cool, thanks. I'll address them later.
Implementation for issue #254 closes #254