Closed alexwalkerepi closed 4 years ago
This is tricky. @inglesp's idea seems the best: have branches generate a differently-named file (temp_branch_input.csv
?) which is deleted on merge; and have the "real" one generated in master on merge.
Hmm. Having started this, it feels a bit messy.
I think perhaps making the CSVs release assets might be the best thing.
We can make latest
always be current master so it can be linked to from the README.
We can also a per-branch release which is deleted when the branch is merged.
It's ugly but we should be encouraging most users to use the command line anyway.
It means we don't end up polluting the git history with meaningless diffs too.
Yes that does sound better, and would mean there's less restriction on the size of dummy data population.
After making a change to the study definition in a PR, the
input.csv
then conflicts with the one inmaster
. This makes it difficult to merge. I guess we always want to keep the more recently generated version.