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

Adding SFO scrapers #107

Open
wants to merge 16 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Adding SFO scrapers #107

wants to merge 16 commits into from

Conversation

patcon
Copy link

@patcon patcon commented Feb 19, 2016

I'll just start an issue to track this, in case anyone else is working on it or interested.

Currently, I've got people scrapers working. This isn't ready for merge yet

cc: @tdooner

@patcon
Copy link
Author

patcon commented Feb 19, 2016

Also, I've written to a feedback email address (presumably the clerk's office) to request that more information be added to the People page, so that we have data comparable to Chicago coming directly from Legistar.

@fgregg
Copy link
Contributor

fgregg commented Feb 19, 2016

I would really recommend you use the legistar base scraper, like I do for Chicago and NYC. https://github.com/opencivicdata/python-legistar-scraper

@patcon
Copy link
Author

patcon commented Feb 19, 2016

Odd. I thought I copied this from Chicago and edited from there. I'll investigate where I went astray

EDIT: Seems ChicagoPeopleScraper is using the old way, so I'll steal from NY. Thanks for the heads up

@fgregg
Copy link
Contributor

fgregg commented Feb 19, 2016

you would be better off using nyc as your template. Chicago is an older scraper, in some parts, and is not fully using python-legistar

@patcon
Copy link
Author

patcon commented Feb 19, 2016

Seems that I can't get most of the benefits of the new PeopleScraper until the city adds a "District" column, so going to leave the people scraper as-is until they get back to me on that.

@fgregg
Copy link
Contributor

fgregg commented Feb 19, 2016

Are you saying that python-legistar assumes that a column exist that does
not exist in sf?

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:22 PM Patrick Connolly [email protected]
wrote:

Seems that I can't get most of the benefits of the new PeopleScraper until
the city adds a "District" column, so going to leave the people scraper
as-is until they get back to me on that.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#107 (comment)
.

@patcon
Copy link
Author

patcon commented Feb 19, 2016

Yeah, but it's a reasonable one. I'm going to push on the clerk to get district in

EDIT: Ah wait. no. I misread you there. I was saying much of the benefit of using python-legistar is lost without district. What I have pulls in just as much as python-legistar. So I'm going to hold off on re-doing it until "district" column is added.

@patcon
Copy link
Author

patcon commented Feb 19, 2016

But I digress. I have something working, and I'm going to leave it until I get can more value from your better way. That's all I'm saying. :)

@fgregg
Copy link
Contributor

fgregg commented Feb 19, 2016

got it.

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:57 PM Patrick Connolly [email protected]
wrote:

But I digress. I have something working, and I'm going to leave it until I
get can more value from your better way. That's all I'm saying. :)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#107 (comment)
.

@fgregg
Copy link
Contributor

fgregg commented Feb 4, 2017

What's the status of this?

@patcon
Copy link
Author

patcon commented Feb 5, 2017

Hi! It was working last I touched it, but I'm back in Toronto, and so not using it anymore. Unless someone from SF wanted to adopt, probably good to close it out?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants