Skip to content
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

Changes to the data model to reconcile with caac-map #250

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 10, 2015

Conversation

dmtroyer
Copy link
Contributor

@dmtroyer dmtroyer commented Oct 9, 2015

  • Added after_this and before_this attributes to Opportunity which are references to other opportunities.
  • Added badge_class_id to Opportunity, which should reference a badge class id url ala the open badges spec.
  • Added resource_type and resource_sub_type models and subsequent attributes to Opportunity and OpportunityInstance which default to opportunity's if the instance doesn't have one.
  • Removed hardcoded type on Opportunity and OpportunityInstance
  • Updated seed data

@MatthewVita @timothyfcook yinz want to take a look at this? should reconcile differences we found with caac-map in #163.

@whit537 turns out nothing really seems to need to change in caac-map itself, I updated the google spreadsheet, maybe regenerate output/topics.json. I tried but failed, having trouble with python 3.5 on my vagrant.

…ovements.

* Added after and before this attributes to opportunity.
* Added badge class id to opportunity, which should reference a BadgeClass id url
* Added resource type and sub type to opportunity and opportunity instance
@MatthewVita
Copy link
Contributor

This all looks great to me! Merging to master.

MatthewVita added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2015
Changes to the data model to reconcile with caac-map
@MatthewVita MatthewVita merged commit 73e4cb8 into master Oct 10, 2015
@MatthewVita MatthewVita deleted the reconcile_data_models_2 branch October 10, 2015 01:24
@MatthewVita
Copy link
Contributor

My only tiny comment would be to add a comment above the following lines

def resource_type
self[:resource_type] ? self[:resource_type] : self.opportunity.resource_type
end
def resource_sub_type
self[:resource_sub_type] ? self[:resource_sub_type] : self.opportunity.resource_sub_type
end
that expands on how we're grabbing from the "parent" Opportunity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants