generated from cal-itp/mkdocs-template
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
employee_run_dates.txt #87
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
29 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
8291088
rough rosters and employee assignment spec
skyqrose f393e84
employee_run_dates.txt:exception_type can be omitted
skyqrose d3d1de0
more edits to roster spec. rename rosters to roster_positions.
skyqrose 66ffdac
service_id may be omitted
skyqrose fb4e3b3
fixup uniqueness
skyqrose 025ee2e
add to examples todo
skyqrose f9dbb9a
typo
skyqrose 3780c5b
move drafts of examples into a new file
skyqrose 64e3368
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into roster
skyqrose 991e8b3
lint
skyqrose 24f2502
adjust employee_id column order and docs
skyqrose f3c883b
write a couple examples
skyqrose 737edce
write a couple more examples
skyqrose 9c9b4b9
finish drafing examples
skyqrose d68b2f0
add links
skyqrose 841eaf8
adjust column order. proofread
skyqrose df8466f
move employee_run_dates to top of roster. forbid run if exception_type=2
skyqrose 6b533c2
lint
skyqrose 6097800
typo
skyqrose 952e47b
remove all files except employee_run_dates.txt
skyqrose 0394dcf
make service ID required
skyqrose 76dcf58
move one remaining example to main examples file
skyqrose 67da576
fix file list
skyqrose b15606d
date description. example calendar header.
skyqrose e0e9cd3
remove duplicate rows from example
skyqrose a16c162
prohibit multiple employees on the same run. adjust column order
skyqrose d933e26
allow assigning multiple employees to the same run
skyqrose 97cea85
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into roster-simple
skyqrose e7bc306
fix broken links
skyqrose File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The primary key being
*
suggests that multiple employees could be schedule for the same run and service_id on the same day. While we know this situation occurs in reality when there are service problems, is there a case for scheduling this way? We suggest the primary key be(date, run_id, service_id)
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think this is good. My original thought was that if two employees really are doing the same thing all day (maybe like 2 fare collectors who work the same trains), they could share a run number and the producer could skip some rows. But consumers knowing that there's at most one employee per run is more valuable.
I've made the change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd request to revert this change for the original reason cited by @skyqrose: on the railroad front, it is common to have multiple employees assigned to the same run.
While some may pre-specify by craft, others include dual-certified personnel whereby two employees work the same run and are required to vary up who works as the engineer vs conductor on each trip. Likewise, other operations include two matched crew members who work identical shifts in the same function.
In practice, I suspect most consumers can treat
(date, run_id, service_id)
as the primary key, but retaining the flexibility for those of us who schedule that way would be ideal.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I didn't realize that there were schedules like that in practice. Given that this is a real situation, I'll revert it.