Skip to content
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

feat(shared-data): add peak shared data definition #16876

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Nov 20, 2024

Conversation

ryanthecoder
Copy link
Contributor

@ryanthecoder ryanthecoder commented Nov 18, 2024

Overview

This new pipette type features a different threaded rod drive nut and some other mechanical changes that increase the maximum speed that the plunger can move so that this pipette can be used in emulsification applications.

Test Plan and Hands on Testing

Changelog

Review requests

Risk assessment

@ryanthecoder ryanthecoder requested review from a team as code owners November 18, 2024 21:33
Copy link
Member

@sfoster1 sfoster1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it is unfortunately PEEK, for the material

@ryanthecoder ryanthecoder force-pushed the EXEC-846-peak-shared-data-def branch from 386a7d5 to 9d99d54 Compare November 19, 2024 16:02
Copy link
Member

@sfoster1 sfoster1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd love to figure out a way for this to be p1000_multi_emulsify (with an underscore) but if it makes it lots harder it's okay to not have it

@@ -2690,6 +2690,7 @@
"p1000_single_gen2",
"p1000_single_flex",
"p1000_multi_flex",
"p1000_multiemulsify",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
"p1000_multiemulsify",
"p1000_multi_emulsify",

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I kind of hate this but if it makes everything a million times harder to have the underscore we're fine without it

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

See the commit after this, I think this is actually the only place we need to have it specially processed.

Copy link
Member

@sfoster1 sfoster1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, looks good to me!

@ryanthecoder ryanthecoder merged commit 54a4017 into edge Nov 20, 2024
58 of 59 checks passed
ryanthecoder added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 23, 2024
<!--
Thanks for taking the time to open a Pull Request (PR)! Please make sure
you've read the "Opening Pull Requests" section of our Contributing
Guide:

https://github.com/Opentrons/opentrons/blob/edge/CONTRIBUTING.md#opening-pull-requests

GitHub provides robust markdown to format your PR. Links, diagrams,
pictures, and videos along with text formatting make it possible to
create a rich and informative PR. For more information on GitHub
markdown, see:

https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/writing-on-github/getting-started-with-writing-and-formatting-on-github/basic-writing-and-formatting-syntax

To ensure your code is reviewed quickly and thoroughly, please fill out
the sections below to the best of your ability!
-->

This new pipette type features a different threaded rod drive nut and
some other mechanical changes that increase the maximum speed that the
plunger can move so that this pipette can be used in emulsification
applications.
<!--
Describe your PR at a high level. State acceptance criteria and how this
PR fits into other work. Link issues, PRs, and other relevant resources.
-->

<!--
Describe your testing of the PR. Emphasize testing not reflected in the
code. Attach protocols, logs, screenshots and any other assets that
support your testing.
-->

<!--
List changes introduced by this PR considering future developers and the
end user. Give careful thought and clear documentation to breaking
changes.
-->

<!--
- What do you need from reviewers to feel confident this PR is ready to
merge?
- Ask questions.
-->

<!--
- Indicate the level of attention this PR needs.
- Provide context to guide reviewers.
- Discuss trade-offs, coupling, and side effects.
- Look for the possibility, even if you think it's small, that your
change may affect some other part of the system.
- For instance, changing return tip behavior may also change the
behavior of labware calibration.
- How do your unit tests and on hands on testing mitigate this PR's
risks and the risk of future regressions?
- Especially in high risk PRs, explain how you know your testing is
enough.
-->
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.

2 participants