You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The field "series" has been made multiple since 5.13. However, the example "all fields" json file we provide in the guide (scripts/api/data/dataset-create-new-all-default-fields.json) still has a single-value entry for it, making the json unimportable, once the soc. sci. metadata block is updated:
It just needs to be updated the same way we've already updated the file src/test/java/edu/harvard/iq/dataverse/export/ddi/dataset-create-new-all-ddi-fields.json (used by the ddi export tests):
Worth noting that we've been through the same issue with the other field that was recently made multiple - productionPlace. Plus there were all sorts of other things that were missed when those 2 fields were updated in their respective blocks that we had to keep fixing. I will open an issue for documenting a checklist of all such things and all the places where things need to be changed. So we can make it 100% the responsibility of the developer, if (God forbid) anyone else ever needs to make another existing single field multiple. (edit: opened #9634)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Note: this needs to be done before 5.14!
The field "series" has been made multiple since 5.13. However, the example "all fields" json file we provide in the guide (
scripts/api/data/dataset-create-new-all-default-fields.json
) still has a single-value entry for it, making the json unimportable, once the soc. sci. metadata block is updated:It just needs to be updated the same way we've already updated the file
src/test/java/edu/harvard/iq/dataverse/export/ddi/dataset-create-new-all-ddi-fields.json
(used by the ddi export tests):Worth noting that we've been through the same issue with the other field that was recently made multiple - productionPlace. Plus there were all sorts of other things that were missed when those 2 fields were updated in their respective blocks that we had to keep fixing. I will open an issue for documenting a checklist of all such things and all the places where things need to be changed. So we can make it 100% the responsibility of the developer, if (God forbid) anyone else ever needs to make another existing single field multiple. (edit: opened #9634)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: