FHIR Chat · deqm review · committers

Stream: committers

Topic: deqm review


view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Mar 21 2019 at 03:39):

deqm passes all my checks

view this post on Zulip Eric Haas (Mar 21 2019 at 05:39):

The package list is tricky since we have two igs from sept but only focusing on the stu3 one for this ballot. Currently The history file points to the r4 Guide which is not the main guide. I tried to clear it up in the package list. By splitting the paths and making the r3 guide current. We plan to merge in future

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Mar 21 2019 at 05:50):

yes I noted that. I'll sort it out

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Mar 24 2019 at 21:19):

@Eric Haas I've updated the qa.html checks around publication readiness. Because of version issues, the DEQM package-list.json checks are wrong. It fails, but the values are right. So ignore those. but please check this error:

This is about the history page setting in ig.json. It's not really that that I care about though, it's that any history links in the IG go to one of those 2 URLs

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Mar 24 2019 at 21:19):

except, in fact, it should be 'http://hl7.org/fhir/us/davinci-deqm/history.html' or 'http://hl7.org/fhir/us/davinci-deqm/history.cfml'

view this post on Zulip Bryn Rhodes (Mar 25 2019 at 00:19):

So I fixed what I could of this, but it's a challenge, because the actual IG balloted historically with http://hl7.org/fhir/us/davinci-deqm/2018Sep/STU3/

view this post on Zulip Bryn Rhodes (Mar 25 2019 at 00:20):

So the check says it fails the canonical, because the canonical now starts http://hl7.org/fhir/us/davinci-deqm/STU3

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Mar 25 2019 at 02:04):

right, that's the stuff I have to work around manually because of DEQM version stuff

view this post on Zulip Grahame Grieve (Mar 25 2019 at 02:19):

deqm is good to go


Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC