-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
update generate_consumables_item_codes_and_packages
script
#1290
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
update generate_consumables_item_codes_and_packages
script
#1290
Conversation
We add here (within the commit generate_cons_item_pkgs: new consumables added to be included in RF_C…) new consumables into the RF_Consumables_Items_and_Pkgs by the |
…ons_Items_and_Pkgs
943708c
to
18567f8
Compare
Hi @sakshimohan, as we discussed on slack. Once you have time for this, please update the Here, ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages_generated.csv,
And here, ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages_2024-05-15_master.csv, is what we have on the master branch:
|
The columns, The purpose of If I understand your current work, the unit costs in the And I would still vote on having the |
@matt-graham, @tamuri, @tbhallett, Could we have a test for Resource Files like this (ie, not created manually, but generated by a script) to assure no one has manually made a change in that RF? I had no idea it was generated by a script, so I made all the changes manually, but if it caused the test to fail, I might have known. |
@sakshimohan, For some reason, which I can't remember exactly, we chose different gloves for some methods than what was originally there. If you want, I think we could return it, because I don't think it's necessary. (This may have been because we wanted to have them all from the same source (EHP 2021).) |
@sakshimohan
Hence I use what used to be there before in #1298 when re-coding the consumables for contraception:
Would you know if there is difference between these, or should we just go back to the original items? It doesn't seem to me to be the same, but maybe it is close enough? |
Those things look very close to one another to me. If at all possible, I would certainly say to use the items that were defined originally in the ResourceFile without resorting to adding additional items. |
I opened an issue for this: #1385. |
@sakshimohan, I think we can close this PR as we do all differently now, ie we are not using the packages to get the consumable item codes in contraception module anymore and all was re-coded to use the existing names from |
That being the case, I think we need a PR to roll back the manual changes that were made (but now no longer used) so that we're back to the situation of the ResourceFile being regenerable from the processing scripts. |
In past, we merged manual changes in
ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages.csv
, however this supposed to be generated by scriptgenerate_consumables_item_codes_and_packages
. The script need to be updated to generate the version including the manual changes.