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

Bicing Providing wrong data #738

Open
PMARZV opened this issue Jul 8, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Bicing Providing wrong data #738

PMARZV opened this issue Jul 8, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@PMARZV
Copy link

PMARZV commented Jul 8, 2024

It returns 0 ebikes but has_ebikes returns true (quina api utilitzes per bicing? l'he estada buscant i no trobo res)
image

@martgnz
Copy link
Contributor

martgnz commented Jul 8, 2024

This happens because AFAIK has_ebikes has been used in pybikes to mean that a system/or station is ebike capable, not that there are ebikes > 0 in a specific station. I agree with you and it makes more sense to flag it true only when there are ebikes in a station, specially in a system where all stations support ebikes.

No Bicing API is being used right now, data is fetched from this JSON file: https://www.bicing.barcelona/get-stations

@PMARZV
Copy link
Author

PMARZV commented Jul 8, 2024

Yeah kinda confusing in my opinion, thanks! Should i close the issue or is it better to wait if this possible change is implemented?

@martgnz
Copy link
Contributor

martgnz commented Jul 8, 2024

Let's wait and see if the PR is merged: #739. Issue can be closed afterwards.

@eskerda
Copy link
Owner

eskerda commented Jul 8, 2024

The purpose of has_ebikes is a bit confusing, but it's meant to indicate if the station supports/supplies electrical bikes. I guess it's a bit redundant, and could be inferred by checking if ebikes is present on the extra part. I am thinking maybe to just remove it and avoid confusion

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 a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants