Skip to content

NO TICKET: fix units for casing diameter#228

Closed
jacob-a-brown wants to merge 1 commit into
stagingfrom
jab-casing-diameter-fix
Closed

NO TICKET: fix units for casing diameter#228
jacob-a-brown wants to merge 1 commit into
stagingfrom
jab-casing-diameter-fix

Conversation

@jacob-a-brown

@jacob-a-brown jacob-a-brown commented Nov 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why

This PR addresses the following problem / context:

  • Casing diameter is stored in feet, not inches

How

Implementation summary - the following was changed / added / removed:

  • Update documentation and response

Notes

Any special considerations, workarounds, or follow-up work to note?

  • Use bullet points here

@codecov-commenter

codecov-commenter commented Nov 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
db/thing.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
schemas/thing.py 97.67% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/conftest.py 93.43% <ø> (ø)
tests/test_thing.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

@jirhiker jirhiker left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does storing in feet make any logical sense given that well diameters are typically referred to by inches? Ie a 6 inch well not at 0.5 inch well. What was the reason for this change?

@jacob-a-brown

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

That's how it's been stored and retrieved historically. I can get feedback from AMMP and proceed with their input

@jirhiker

jirhiker commented Nov 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

They really shouldn't have much input on how data is stored. Users should not worry about the storage layer only the presentation layer

@jacob-a-brown

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I'll close this PR for now and we can revisit it after further discussions and feedback from AMMP

@TylerAdamMartinez TylerAdamMartinez left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Regarding the code changes, we should either merge this change or close the PR and delete the branch if it's no longer needed. There’s no reason for this work to stay permanently in limbo.

@marissafichera

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

LGTM. Regarding the code changes, we should either merge this change or close the PR and delete the branch if it's no longer needed. There’s no reason for this work to stay permanently in limbo.

Agreed - @jirhiker can you review/resolve this however you think is best?

@jirhiker jirhiker closed this Feb 19, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants