Update the schema diagram to reflect the new ParticleID to ReconstructedParticle relation #303
Conversation
This file contains 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
tmadlener
force-pushed
the
diagram-particle-id-reversal
branch
from
3ed951d to
9b287f6
Compare
jmcarcell
approved these changes
May 10, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Needs #304 to be correct.
I don't mind removing the version, but is it permanent? Otherwise since it doesn't seem there are going to be so many changes before the next version we could just tag it with 1.0 or 0.10.99 (a bit ugly) or maybe pre-1.0
|
Keeping the version would be nice indeed. |
tmadlener
force-pushed
the
diagram-particle-id-reversal
branch
from
9b287f6 to
07ad232
Compare
|
Brought the version back, but I am not entirely sure what to set it to for the moment. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
BEGINRELEASENOTES
ENDRELEASENOTES
I split this into two PRs, because #302 shouldn't be too controversial, while removing the version might be a bit less clear