Enhance/standardize documentation for AssetOrTimeSchedule#69826
Closed
jroachgolf84 wants to merge 2 commits into
Closed
Enhance/standardize documentation for AssetOrTimeSchedule#69826jroachgolf84 wants to merge 2 commits into
AssetOrTimeSchedule#69826jroachgolf84 wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Updated the documentation for AssetOrTimeSchedule to clarify its functionality and usage in scheduling Dags based on both time and asset events.
Collaborator
Author
|
This PR was closed when the branch name was changed. |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Description
Upon reviewing the custom Timetable documentation, I noticed that the
AssetOrTimeScheduletimetable was not listed in the index like the other custom Timetables. I took the opportunity to clean this up to ensure that the same standard was applied.Below is a screenshot of what this previously looked like. Now, this should be fixed.
Testing
No testing was needed, this was a docs-only change.