Yes, we need user names and I can imagine some cases for potential mixed 
cohorts, but not sure about prevalence - Jaime

On Nov 21, 2013, at 5:28 PM, Dario Taraborelli <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> I (and by extension other people in the research team) will probably only 
> ever use user_ids (which we know in advance are valid), so it’s probably best 
> to ask Program Evauation folks or community members who may rely on usernames.
> 
> On Nov 21, 2013, at 5:24 PM, Dan Andreescu <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Edward.  Yes, we temporarily lost the UI that shows what users are 
>> invalid.  I wasn't sure what exactly people needed here so I didn't hazard a 
>> guess.   The data is all there though and I can easily show you invalid 
>> users and invalid reasons for your cohort.
>> 
>> I just maybe need you and someone else to say how you'd like it to work and 
>> I can whip up a view for it tomorrow.  Dario, any opinion on how invalid 
>> users should be displayed?  The only weird part now is that you can't upload 
>> again.  You'd have to delete the whole cohort and start over...
>> —
>> Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Edward Galvez <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Also! Just to introduce myself, I'm one of the interns with the Program 
>>> Evaluation & Design team - thus this upgrade is very timely. Thank you!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Edward Galvez <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for this!  Just did a cohort of 15K and it worked fine. I 
>>>> unintentionally hit the "back" button, but after clicking "forward" and my 
>>>> cohort was validated, not even 10 seconds later. 
>>>> 
>>>> Also, I can't seem to find the place that listed which users were not 
>>>> valid. Did we lose that ability?
>>>> 
>>>> - E
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Dan Andreescu <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Dario Taraborelli 
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> fantastic, is there any chance we could get an even better performance 
>>>>>> if we allowed users to specify the field type in the upload form (if 
>>>>>> it’s just user_ids, validation will be faster and the app doesn’t need 
>>>>>> to check every single entry for a valid user_name too). I understand 
>>>>>> that by design the application makes no assumption about the type of 
>>>>>> that field (and in fact it accepts a mix of user_id’s and user_names, 
>>>>>> correct)?
>>>>> 
>>>>> absolutely, it would run up to 2x faster if the file was all user_ids and 
>>>>> the user specified that up front.  But currently, yes, you can mix 
>>>>> user_ids and user_names 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimetrics mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimetrics
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimetrics mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimetrics
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimetrics mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimetrics
_______________________________________________
Wikimetrics mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimetrics

Reply via email to