Tweaks to workflow and improvements to docs

[javierggt]

Description

• Docs improvements/fixes (new docs posted here):
  • added a list of common terms used to disposition observations
  • added table descriptions to docs (Fixes Document key data files #62)
• Changes in task schedules to:
  • place all heartbeats in the same dir,
  • add a custom notification,
  • notify aca instead of me.
• add obsid to obs_status.yml file, to make it easier for reviewer to find the bad obs.

Testing

• Passes unit tests on MacOS using the soon-to-be-promoted supplement
• Functional testing.
  • docs built locally
  • run on /proj/sot/ska/jgonzalez/miniconda3/envs/agasc before the last four commits (disposition comments, test fix, table column docs)

[jeanconn]

Looks fine to me to throw more of the content in that one directory, while being smart about having different heartbeat files.

[javierggt]

Looks fine to me to throw more of the content in that one directory, while being smart about having different heartbeat files.

Yes. Also note that the heart attack files are not changed, so the default one would kill both.

[jeanconn]

What is status on this one?

[javierggt]

I still have a couple commits to make

[jeanconn]

The column description updates seem a good idea and seem benign. Was that tested in the "run on /proj/sot/ska/jgonzalez/miniconda3/envs/agasc before the last four commits (disposition comments, test fix, table column docs)" test item? Meaning, was a file updated that had the new descriptions and then the tests still pass?

[javierggt]

that was tested on my mac. I ran an update and checked that the resulting file had the descriptions in it, but I did not run on HEAD.

[jeanconn]

Right. I'm not sure about test coverage, but I was thinking that the agasc.test() tests should run in an area that can see the updated-with-descriptions file .

[javierggt]

the column descriptions are only in the fits file, and not in the supplement file, so I don't see how it can affect agasc.test

[jeanconn]

OK. Sounds good. Seems like at some point we might need a test that reads the fits files if that isn't in coverage? But sounds good for being done to approve this PR.