-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
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
#23 Start to add schema for static sources in pp yamls #24
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pretty good! I think we would like variables to be within the history file or offline history file, if possible, and I wasn't sure if history_file was offline or from the model output.
- remove freq - (have to assess what to do with variables)
Thanks @J-Lentz for the catches! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking good! I still think the variables
has to be a element (?? not sure the yaml hame) within sources
or offline_sources
instead of a peer of sources
and offline_sources
. Let's discuss...
FRE/fre_pp.json
Outdated
} | ||
}, | ||
"offline_sources": { | ||
"description": "Path to history file if static source is for offline diagnostics", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A tiny nit.. "history file" implies model output. Not sure what to call it though!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
offline diagnostic?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep, that works!
I agree with this schema of
I believe the schema reflects that now as well (at least it appeared valid in my slight tests). @J-Lentz - do you know if the schema currently reflects this kind of yaml format? |
No description provided.