[Pansophy] C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

[Chris Dreyfuss]

Ok I fixed the field name issue just add a new number behind each one

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Allen Samuels<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 12:26 PM
To: Chris Dreyfuss<mailto:dreyfuss at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>; Danny Forehand<mailto:forehand at jlab.org>; Kurt Macha<mailto:macha at jlab.org>
Subject: RE: C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

You don’t have to do that. You can keep the tech1 and tech2 repeating each step as long as they have descriptors unique to their step

From: Chris Dreyfuss <dreyfuss at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 10:42 AM
To: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>; Danny Forehand <forehand at jlab.org>; Kurt Macha <macha at jlab.org>
Subject: RE: C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

Ok I guess I will have to redo all my travelers then because they all have the tech1 and 2 so I guess I will make them tech 1 and just continue the numbering down the line

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Allen Samuels<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 8:52 AM
To: Chris Dreyfuss<mailto:dreyfuss at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>; Danny Forehand<mailto:forehand at jlab.org>; Kurt Macha<mailto:macha at jlab.org>
Subject: RE: C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

Good Morning Chris. Hope you had a good Thanksgiving.

Regarding the fieldnames, they need to be unique because Pansophy rejects travelers that have repeating fieldnames. The easiest way to make them unique is to add a descriptor at the beginning. For instance, the fieldnames in step 1 could be “RecordTechnician1” and “2”, or “RecordTech1”. Making it a bit more descriptive also makes it easier when datamining, as you then have a better idea of what is going on (or in this case, who is doing what). If you have any further questions, I’d suggest you check out the traveler authorship powerpoint and checklist found on the pansophy front page.

Allen Samuels

From: Chris Dreyfuss <dreyfuss at jlab.org<mailto:dreyfuss at jlab.org>>
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 8:13 AM
To: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>>; Danny Forehand <forehand at jlab.org<mailto:forehand at jlab.org>>; Kurt Macha <macha at jlab.org<mailto:macha at jlab.org>>
Subject: RE: C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

Yes use which everyone is the correct one, and also I’m confused about what the line should be if its not supposed to say Technician1 and Technician2.

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Allen Samuels<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 3:38 PM
To: Chris Dreyfuss<mailto:dreyfuss at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>; Danny Forehand<mailto:forehand at jlab.org>; Kurt Macha<mailto:macha at jlab.org>
Subject: RE: C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

Hi Chris. Sorry I didn’t notice this earlier, but C75-CAV-ASSY has some additional problems in the fieldnames. There are multiple instances of Technician 1 and 2 a fieldnames, which can’t be put into pansophy. Please update the names and send it back.

Allen

From: Pansophy <pansophy-bounces at mailman.jlab.org<mailto:pansophy-bounces at mailman.jlab.org>> On Behalf Of Allen Samuels
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 3:01 PM
To: Chris Dreyfuss <dreyfuss at jlab.org<mailto:dreyfuss at jlab.org>>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>>
Subject: Re: [Pansophy] C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

Hi Chris. It’s come to my attention that the C75-CLNRM-ENDD-ASSY was already routed for approval and has just been approved. Were you wanting this version to be replaced with the version you sent today? If not, am I good to upload the approved traveler and disregard the one in ready for approvals?

Allen

From: Chris Dreyfuss <dreyfuss at jlab.org<mailto:dreyfuss at jlab.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 11:58 AM
To: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>>
Subject: RE: C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

Ok hopefully I fixed it now all three are back in with the new changes

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Allen Samuels<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 4:04 PM
To: Chris Dreyfuss<mailto:dreyfuss at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>
Subject: C75 Travelers Ready for Approval

Hi Chris,

I was looking over the three C75 travelers you put in, and I noticed a few issues. The C75-CAV-ASSY and C75-CPR-ASSY-FNAL travelers are in the old template, missing out on the second NCR slot and the d3 emails. In addition, the C75-CLNRM-ENDD-ASSY still has track changes on and some changes left in. This I can change on my end as long as you are satisfied with how it looks, but I’d appreciate it if you could remove these before sending it out. It makes me second guess myself less. Although I would ask that you take a look at the second reference in the traveler. Something about it is off, I think there’s two different hyperlinks in it.

Allen Samuels




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20201130/84bf4ebd/attachment-0001.html>