-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
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
remove redundant data #530
Comments
Can user falls table be removed entirely? Probably not but it should be checked against CABD |
Feedback is that CABD will include Bonnington falls but I'll just leave the table as is for now. Next redundant data clean should be
Note that for falls, the usage of this table is now just to prevent falls with observations upstream from being ignored. Data and tables could probably be reorganized/renamed. |
For CABD features I'm thinking a table like below, supporting:
|
A Currently, if a falls is flagged as a barrier in this table (based on salmon review, such as falls on |
Examine fix tables and remove records that do not actually apply a fix.
Note that this could also be done as an action on PR but that isn't worth implementing until we have better docs on what fixes go where.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: