search

e-mission / nrel-openpath-deploy-configs

Configurations for current OpenPATH deployments, published for transparency
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
2 stars 9 forks source link

Surveys info and surveys data for Configs #8

Open sebastianbarry opened 1 year ago

sebastianbarry commented 1 year ago

ONLY WORKS FOR DEV_PROGRAM AND DEV_STUDY, to incorporate this into the existing studies/programs we will need to add the survey_info.buttons fields for all the others as well

This is the new refactored format for the dynamic configs that contains:

  1. The survey-resources directory (originally from e-mission-phone)
  2. The new "library" style file for the list of available surveys under configs/surveys/surveys.json
  3. The new survey_info field in the configs json for dev-emulator-program and dev-emulator-study
  4. 2 new variants for the dev-emulator-program/study called dev-emulator-program-tripconfirm and dev-emulator-study-tripconfirm

Because this is a new PR, let's close the original dynamic surveys pr https://github.com/e-mission/nrel-openpath-deploy-configs/pull/7 because it is old, not exactly what we want, and has some problems in terms of incorrect commits and confusion

sebastianbarry commented 1 year ago

@shankari and @JGreenlee

Adding you both for visibility

sebastianbarry commented 1 year ago

Here are the generated QR codes if you would rather just scan them/copy paste them from here:

image
Devapp Study Tripconfirm emission://join_study?label=dev-emulator-study-tripconfirm&source=github
Devapp Program Tripconfirm emission://join_study?label=dev-emulator-program-tripconfirm&source=github
shankari commented 1 year ago

@sebastianbarry wrt https://github.com/e-mission/nrel-openpath-deploy-configs/pull/8/commits/bacd4ffc826ad55af2da28d4fc15cbed7fdffadf, did you and @JGreenlee decide to go with the simple but verbose version since it is already implemented?

I am fine with that decision, and I'm glad to see that we are focusing on getting the code to work, but just want to understand the reasons.

JGreenlee commented 1 year ago

@shankari @sebastianbarry Yes, given our time constraints we are trying to just get it working, so we decided to roll back to the more verbose version at least for now. We can revisit the dynamic surveys.json later if necessary - but we would need to write the logic to load in the surveys.json file by URL and would want your input before we made those decisions