GPC - It's great that we have multiple code repositories that you are willing to share for our CDM scripts. I will reference the one that KUMC manages for sure. I'm not so concerned with fixing specific issues. All of our organizations have great data analysts to figure the issues out.
I'm not concerned about fixing specific issues. What I'm asking for is if we can have a central list of issues we have fixed in our CDRN, so that if someone joins the group or someone or someone has a question, or we begin to organize an ontology (with full documentation) for our CDRN, we can simply look at that list and see who had the same issue with their i2b2 and CDM scripts, and what the resolution was, in plain English, along with a reference to the code repository. Some software companies would refer to this as an Executive Summary. Then we can start to establish major and minor versions for CDM within GPC. It might seem like lot of work to maintain such a list, but I'm sure everyone would benefit. And if we used something similar to Google Docs (or some tool) for such a list, I'm sure it would be useful for our group. Eventually (I'm hoping), we get a central ontology for our GPC CDRN, that we can all agree to as a group. If we can't organize a simple spreadsheet of CDM issues we've run into as a group, I think we're asking too much to manage an ontology as a group. Let me know if someone disagrees. Keith Wanta (WISC) From: Dan Connolly [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 3:41 PM To: Wanta Keith M; [email protected] Subject: RE: CDM v3 Appendix B fixes - pencils down? If you're asking whether you should track your i2p-transform and shilhs-ontology changes using git and github, then yes, I highly recommend it. You're more than welcome to fork https://github.com/kumc-bmi/i2p-transform . Newer versions are typically better than older versions. In particular, for kumc-bmi/i2p-transform, we do new development on branches and only merge reviewed code to master. This is mostly just platitudes; If you can give an example of which CDM v3 fix you have in mind, I might be able to give a more useful answer. -- Dan ________________________________ From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [[email protected]] on behalf of Wanta Keith M [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 3:02 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: CDM v3 Appendix B fixes - pencils down? GPC - Have we make a decision on whether we should be making our CDM v3 Appendix B fixes based on some past revision of the i2p-transform and scilhs-ontology repositories, or.... Should we be applying code changes overtime from GitHub for CDM v3 Appendix B fixes? (putting aside ontology mappings we do internally) Thanks, Keith Wanta (WISC)
_______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
