Add new 'precipitation' standard name rule.#35
Merged
nusbaume merged 2 commits intoESCOMP:mainfrom May 16, 2023
Merged
Conversation
nusbaume
requested review from
cacraigucar,
climbfuji,
dudhia,
grantfirl,
ligiabernardet and
mkavulich
cacraigucar
reviewed
Apr 28, 2023
…alling hydrometeor.
mkavulich
approved these changes
May 15, 2023
grantfirl
approved these changes
May 15, 2023
cacraigucar
approved these changes
May 15, 2023
Collaborator
Author
|
Given the approvals and discussion from yesterday's framework meeting I'll go ahead and merge this PR. Of course if anyone has problems or concerns with the new rule then we can always revert the change or open a new PR with updated text. Thanks! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The CGD scientists had some debate about what the word "precipitation" should mean in the context of a standard name. After discussing it in a framework meeting, the following rule proposed in this PR seemed to be a good option. Please let me know if you think otherwise, or would like any changes. Thanks!