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

Oifs48r1 further reading #1093

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Oifs48r1 further reading #1093

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

nwieters
Copy link
Contributor

@nwieters nwieters commented Nov 8, 2023

This PR solves the option to put a further_reading entry inside a choose_version block.

closes #1085

@nwieters nwieters changed the base branch from release to oifs48r1 November 8, 2023 13:08
@nwieters nwieters marked this pull request as ready for review November 8, 2023 13:26
@nwieters
Copy link
Contributor Author

nwieters commented Nov 8, 2023

Hi @JanStreffing , @mandresm ,

this PR now enables to set further_reading inside a choose_version block.
I still need to test this, if it also works for setups.

I am not sure if this is the most elegant way. I had to workaround the fact that the function resolve_choose_with_var only searches for the variable version in a component config section and not in the general part. This is probably only needed for standalone models. And if the version variable is defined in the runscript general section. I hope I understood this correctly.

In the oifs48.env.yaml I had to comment out the settings for juwels since it complained about conflicting settings in a machine file.

@nwieters
Copy link
Contributor Author

nwieters commented Nov 8, 2023

For setups it doesn't work so far.
For example: awicm3
It is complaining that in further_reading file oifs.env.yaml many of the ${computer.} variables can not be resolved.
Strangely also variables that are called for choose_computer block for mistral are tried to be resolved.

@mandresm
Copy link
Contributor

mandresm commented Nov 9, 2023

The problems that @nwieters is facing are related to versions not being copied early enough from general to oifs section. I have modified that function and put it earlier in the workflow to solve the problem in #1097

@nwieters
Copy link
Contributor Author

nwieters commented Nov 9, 2023

Ok. Thank you @mandresm . I guess this PR is obsolete now. I will close it.

@nwieters nwieters closed this Nov 9, 2023
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 this pull request may close these issues.

further_reading with esm_master
2 participants