-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
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
add receiver_id to obspy inventory #110
Conversation
If this is good should I go ahead and update the CHANGELOG in this PR as well to reflect the changes we are going to put into 4.0.2? |
Yeah update the change log. I assigned milestones to all the issues resolved in v4.0.2. It's a good idea to reference the issue number for each item. https://github.com/PIC-IRIS/PH5/milestone/1 I'll test this now. |
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.
The receiver-id shows up at the station level in the StationXML output. I thought receiver-id was the same as the das? Wouldn't this mean that it should be at the channel level?
CHANGELOG.txt
Outdated
* Fixed memory leak bug and reduced memory usage | ||
-ph5.clients.ph5tostationxml | ||
-ph5.clients.ph5tostationxml (issue #107) | ||
* added receiver-id to obspy inventory and added an extra atribute at teh station level |
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.
@derick-hess Oops I notices a few small typos "teh" instead of "the" and "atribute" instead of "attribute"
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.
I'll fix that
Yeah I think channel level might be the more correct place to put that since there are cases you might have multiple receivers at the same station. I'll update the change log and move it to the channel level now |
Yeah I think so assuming I'm understanding its meaning correctly. Like you said, there may be cases where you would have 3 single component instruments. |
We do that sometimes with texans where 3 single channel texans are attached to one 3 channel sensor, so having receiver-id at channel level is correct. |
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.
Looks good. Go ahead and squash merge if you're happy with it.
adresses #107