provenance report history #152
Assignees
Comments
|
I think this would be really positive for demonstrating the power of the pipeline. Maybe adding an argument that specifies the maximum depth so that we could show things as they currently are if wanted (perhaps by default, setting maxdepth to 1), but could show much more if available... @antony-wilson @nathan-cummings-ukaea @alahiff do you think this is possible (by Friday!)? |
|
Hopefully I should have something working today |
|
Shall we merge #147 before making a branch on this (to avoid any merge conflicts)? |
antony-wilson
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 28, 2021
|
can this now be closed? |
|
It seems that it can be closed indeed - @antony-wilson can you confirm? |
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# to comment
It would be great if a code run referencing data products generated in previous code runs, included these previous code runs in its provenance report.
We’d like to be able to display the trace of showing the language implementations are the same in a single provenance diagram.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: