Old school version

[volodymyrss]

No description provided.

[ferrigno]

"We encourage the developers to supply tests that will be automatically executed from time to time during service operations and are supposed to always yield exactly the same results." should contain a reference to a page where it is explained how to make a test. As of now, I would simply skip this point, as I do not not know how to implement a test. @andriineronov do you know how to do it?

[ferrigno]

"Note that some of the input parameters in the example of the Fermi/LAT Lightcurve.ipynb notebook appear as multiple choice parameters with pre-defined values, while others are query fields." This is not clear, it needs to be elaborated with a reference or more text, I do not understand why some parameters are multiple choice and what is regulating this. What if I would like to make a multiple choice ?

[volodymyrss]

"Note that some of the input parameters in the example of the Fermi/LAT Lightcurve.ipynb notebook appear as multiple choice parameters with pre-defined values, while others are query fields." This is not clear, it needs to be elaborated with a reference or more text, I do not understand why some parameters are multiple choice and what is regulating this. What if I would like to make a multiple choice ?

it's because of the annotations. It may be good to explain more, look in the annotations to see why it is like so. If unclear, propose some text?

[volodymyrss]

"We encourage the developers to supply tests that will be automatically executed from time to time during service operations and are supposed to always yield exactly the same results." should contain a reference to a page where it is explained how to make a test. As of now, I would simply skip this point, as I do not not know how to implement a test. @andriineronov do you know how to do it?

I added a reference

[dsavchenko]

I added a reference

But we don't run tests in the current mode of deployment https://github.com/oda-hub/nb2workflow/blob/2d838468464abb22f0770440bd616a54d600a6ce/nb2workflow/deploy.py#L74C26-L74C26

We need to adapt. Run tests as k8s jobs or something?

[ferrigno]

"Note that some of the input parameters in the example of the Fermi/LAT Lightcurve.ipynb notebook appear as multiple choice parameters with pre-defined values, while others are query fields." This is not clear, it needs to be elaborated with a reference or more text, I do not understand why some parameters are multiple choice and what is regulating this. What if I would like to make a multiple choice ?

it's because of the annotations. It may be good to explain more, look in the annotations to see why it is like so. If unclear, propose some text?

The multiple choice of Lightcurve, spectrum image is not in the input parameters nor in the "default" parameter block.

What I propose:

Some automatic multiple choice parameters are inserted by default in the product tab: these are .....

If users needs to introduce a multiple choice for string (or any other format), they need to add the annotation ``oda:allowed_value "LIN","LOG"` after the parameter type annotation.

However, these two parts should be added in the respective sections and the point mentioned here. As I do not have all the overview, would you do it, @volodymyrss or should I make a commit and you complete it?

[ferrigno]

Overall, the guide is very well written and clear, my comments were just to improve some details. There looks to be still something not clear on tests, though.

[dsavchenko]

I've added some description for the features not documented yet.
@andriineronov I leave you to add meaningful acknowledgements to Fermi and make the screenshot.

Also, does anyone remember if we have the workflow which actually returns comments via oda:WorkflowResultComment ?

[volodymyrss]

I've added some description for the features not documented yet. @andriineronov I leave you to add meaningful acknowledgements to Fermi and make the screenshot.

Also, does anyone remember if we have the workflow which actually returns comments via oda:WorkflowResultComment ?

I do not remember.
We can add it to the example.

[dsavchenko]

When do we plan to merge these changes?

[volodymyrss]

we waited for remaining reviews but ok.

[volodymyrss]

I merged this then without @ferrigno or @andriineronov re-reading and looks like we added at least one issue doing it, see #66 . A typo it seems (aknowledgements.md), but I do not know which way the typo works here.