Closed coldfix closed 9 years ago
Right, many questions, let me try to answer a few at least.
To answer your suggestions:
Thanks for all the explanations!
Okay, I see why the pathes are set up in the way they are then. Does the current implementation allow the pymad user to load from AFS if he wants? I don't see code for that anywhere. Maybe I have removed it in some of the model_locator patches.
What do you think about subclassing ModelLocator
to load any data from the AFS if available. This enables the user to decide whether he wants to use AFS or not by using the correct locator type.
Hi, yes, it would be good if the model_locator could optionally use any of the paths defined in dbdir as an alternative to the installed files.
If implementing #33 (especially then, but also independent from it) it would make sense to think about restructuring the model definitions. I find the current format somewhat too nested and I am not sure about the purpose/distinction of some of the fields:
{ .., "parse": "STRENGTHS" }
and{ ..., "overlay": true }
have some meaning to pymad or do you just use them for some applicationFor my current application a structure like this would be sufficient: