Skip to content

Conversation

georgemccabe
Copy link
Collaborator

@georgemccabe georgemccabe commented Nov 4, 2024

Pull Request Testing

  • Describe testing already performed for these changes:

Use case tests pass

  • Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:
  • Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [Yes]

  • Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes]

  • Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [No]

    If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:

  • Do these changes introduce new SonarQube findings? [No]

    If yes, please describe:

  • Please complete this pull request review by 11/6/2024.

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

  • Add any new Python packages to the METplus Components Python Requirements table.
  • For any new datasets, an entry to the METplus Verification Datasets Guide.
  • Review the source issue metadata (required labels, projects, and milestone).
  • Complete the PR definition above.
  • Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
  • Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow.
    Select: Reviewer(s) and Development issue
    Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes
    Select: Coordinated METplus-X.Y Support project for bugfix releases or METplus-Wrappers-X.Y.Z Development project for official releases
  • After submitting the PR, select the ⚙️ icon in the Development section of the right hand sidebar. Search for the issue that this PR will close and select it, if it is not already selected.
  • After the PR is approved, merge your changes. If permissions do not allow this, request that the reviewer do the merge.
  • Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

@georgemccabe georgemccabe added this to the METplus-6.0.0 milestone Nov 4, 2024
@georgemccabe georgemccabe linked an issue Nov 4, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
23 tasks
@georgemccabe georgemccabe marked this pull request as ready for review November 4, 2024 20:18
@georgemccabe georgemccabe marked this pull request as draft November 18, 2024 16:33
georgemccabe and others added 4 commits December 9, 2024 15:58
… RST, and adds special note under the dataset section that if a user has GRIB or other data without a time dimension, they need to somehow create a data object or file with a time dimension in order to use the fcst_tci Python embedding script since it assumes there is a time dimension on the forecast data.
@DanielAdriaansen DanielAdriaansen marked this pull request as ready for review June 6, 2025 20:26
@DanielAdriaansen
Copy link
Contributor

@anewman89 I think this is ready to go. George and myself made changes to remove cesm from lots of configuration items and script names, and more generally refer to it as TCI_FCST. I also added this note to the documentation in the dataset section for users (see blue box with "Note" title):
https://metplus--2768.org.readthedocs.build/en/2768/generated/model_applications/land_surface/PointStat_fcstCESM_obsFLUXNET2015_TCI.html#datasets

Can you please give this a lookover and add your review if you feel the changes are sufficient to help users with data other than CESM/NetCDF?

@anewman89
Copy link

Thanks @DanielAdriaansen and @georgemccabe! I think this is sufficient as a base capability. We'll see if we get feedback from users at any point.

@DanielAdriaansen DanielAdriaansen merged commit e3d4244 into develop Jun 18, 2025
82 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 🔎 In review to 🏁 Done in METplus-6.1 Development Jun 18, 2025
@DanielAdriaansen DanielAdriaansen deleted the feature_2575_tci_general_model branch June 18, 2025 20:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
No open projects
Status: 🏁 Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Enhance TCI use case to be flexible for other models besides CESM
3 participants