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

Update limits in currently used mups model spec files #122

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 24, 2024

Conversation

matthewdahmer
Copy link
Contributor

@matthewdahmer matthewdahmer commented Apr 18, 2024

This PR updates the two production mups model spec files to reflect the new planning.warning.high thermal limit of 215F and bumps the version from 3.52 to 3.52.1.

Files Modified:

  • chandra_models/xija/mups_valve/pm1thv2t_spec.json: Limit updates only
  • chandra_models/xija/mups_valve/pm2thv1t_spec_matlab.json: Limit updates only
  • chandra_models/__init__.py: version increment

Files Added: None

Files Removed: None

@matthewdahmer matthewdahmer merged commit 6c0e76b into master Apr 24, 2024
@matthewdahmer matthewdahmer deleted the mups_limit_inc branch April 24, 2024 14:07
@jeanconn
Copy link

jeanconn commented May 1, 2024

Like the other *matlab.json file that hung around, is the plan to eventually integrate the pm2thv1t_spec_matlab.json changes back into pm2thv1t_spec.json ? Or should that model eventually get removed if nothing is using it? Thanks!

@matthewdahmer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes that is technically the plan, however changing a simple filename results in far more work (i.e. testing) than just leaving it the way it is due to how the filename is stored in the FOT Matlab Tools. It would be much easier to just remove the old filename for now.

@jeanconn
Copy link

jeanconn commented May 1, 2024

Thanks Matt. And understood. And yeah, from a reviewer perspective there just seemed to be a lot of pm2thv1t models in here and I wanted to make sure that if they were in use in any way they had the right changes going forward. So if they aren't in use yeah it seems like a good idea to remove (at some point) or perhaps even add a README?

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.

3 participants