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

process_* are related to Bay Delta Schism and should be moved there #9

Open
dwr-psandhu opened this issue Aug 18, 2023 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@dwr-psandhu
Copy link
Contributor

Description

There are process_*.py that transform the repo data into schism related files. These should be moved from here to BayDeltaSCHISM repo

https://github.com/CADWRDeltaModeling/BayDeltaSCHISM

@dwr-psandhu dwr-psandhu added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 18, 2023
@water-e
Copy link
Contributor

water-e commented Jan 26, 2024

@dwr-psandhu It would be worth drilling into this. I agree the *.th format and particular combinations for SCHISM are not of general interest. Yet the scripts contain things that might be general. Things like filled time series or even more complex combinations as in process_yolo.py or process_exports.py? Where will we put processed data (or derived)?

Should the functionality be in dms_datastore or a new dms_dataprep? I think we will need to assume some useful data production efforts are federated and done outside then added to the repository on a dropbox-like basis and I'm working sloly on that.

However would make sense to force/centralize the issue a bit for the really important stuff like the boundaries? I don't mind that these products be stashed away in univariate csv format. Then later on the process_*.py scripts in BayDeltaSCHISM would do a much smaller workload -- just pick up the already-done work and put it in the th format.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants