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

fix: li missing platform name #2993

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

BENR0
Copy link
Collaborator

@BENR0 BENR0 commented Nov 21, 2024

This fixes the DataArrays returned by the li reader missing the platform_name attribute.

  • Closes #xxxx
  • Tests added
  • Fully documented
  • Add your name to AUTHORS.md if not there already

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 21, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.10%. Comparing base (0589f61) to head (c1c7357).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2993   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.10%   96.10%           
=======================================
  Files         377      377           
  Lines       55162    55192   +30     
=======================================
+ Hits        53012    53042   +30     
  Misses       2150     2150           
Flag Coverage Δ
behaviourtests 3.94% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unittests 96.19% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11951131663

Details

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 96.193%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 11936881763: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 53241
Relevant Lines: 55348

💛 - Coveralls

@ameraner
Copy link
Member

Thanks @BENR0 , I've noticed this as well recently. Could we take the platform info from the filename and use the mapping as done for FCI here?

_platform_name_translate = {
"MTI1": "MTG-I1",
"MTI2": "MTG-I2",
"MTI3": "MTG-I3",
"MTI4": "MTG-I4"}

Although the question of the platform name and the operational renaming to e.g. MET-12 is very valid...

@BENR0
Copy link
Collaborator Author

BENR0 commented Nov 21, 2024

@ameraner Maybe we just wait till it is renamed to fix it? Shouldn't be that long till then I guess? ;-)
And yes I think a mapping would make it more future proof.

@ameraner
Copy link
Member

Yeah, should only be a couple of weeks or so :) As you prefer, I'm ok also with merging this and update again later.
Then I would use a mapping/naming similar to what is used for SEVIRI, like Meteosat-XX

self.mda["platform_name"] = "Meteosat-" + SATNUM[self.platform_id]

@BENR0
Copy link
Collaborator Author

BENR0 commented Dec 4, 2024

@ameraner Do you know if the name will eventually also be changed on https://space.oscar.wmo.int/satellites/ from MTG-I1 to Meteosat-12?

@ameraner
Copy link
Member

ameraner commented Dec 4, 2024

I assume so, as the MSG satellites are also listed as Meteosat-XX.

@BENR0
Copy link
Collaborator Author

BENR0 commented Dec 5, 2024

@ameraner @mraspaud I changed the platform name for FCI/LI according to the renaming after MTG went operational.

@ameraner
Copy link
Member

ameraner commented Dec 5, 2024

Thanks! The changes look good to me, however it seems that both the FCI and LI tests need to be updated..

@BENR0
Copy link
Collaborator Author

BENR0 commented Dec 5, 2024

@ameraner good point. didn't check those. Fixed the tests. Not very nice though, a lot of repitition. Maybe should be refactored at some point to convert the filehandler which is used quite often into a fixture.

Copy link
Member

@ameraner ameraner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Ready for review
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants