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

Feature 2643 generic install #2657

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Aug 23, 2023
Merged

Feature 2643 generic install #2657

merged 7 commits into from
Aug 23, 2023

Conversation

jprestop
Copy link
Collaborator

Expected Differences

  • Do these changes introduce new tools, command line arguments, or configuration file options? [No]

    If yes, please describe:

  • Do these changes modify the structure of existing or add new output data types (e.g. statistic line types or NetCDF variables)? [Yes or No]

    If yes, please describe:

Pull Request Testing

  • Describe testing already performed for these changes:

    I ran a test installation on seneca.

  • Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:

    It would be great if you had time to also run through a test installation using this file, however, if you don't have time, that is ok too. If you do run through, you'll need to change the MET_TARBALL to be v11.1.0.tar.gz.

  • Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [Yes]

  • Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes]

  • Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [No]

    If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:

  • Please complete this pull request review by [When it is convenient for you].

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

  • Review the source issue metadata (required labels, projects, and milestone).
  • Complete the PR definition above.
  • Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
  • Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow.
    Select: Reviewer(s)
    Select: Organization level software support Project or Repository level development cycle Project
    Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes
  • After submitting the PR, select the ⚙️ icon in the Development section of the right hand sidebar. Search for the issue that this PR will close and select it, if it is not already selected.
  • After the PR is approved, merge your changes. If permissions do not allow this, request that the reviewer do the merge.
  • Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

@jprestop jprestop added this to the MET 12.0.0 milestone Aug 21, 2023
@jprestop jprestop requested a review from j-opatz August 21, 2023 16:37
@j-opatz j-opatz linked an issue Aug 22, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
7 tasks
export USE_MET_TAR_FILE=FALSE

#If you've already compiled these and don't need to compile them again, set the following
# If you've already used the script to compile these libaries and don't need to
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just checking that I'm interpreting this correctly: if a user already has the libraries installed, they can leave the statements commented out, ONLY IF they're installed in the {EXTERNAL_LIBS} location. Otherwise, if they're installed somewhere else the user will need to uncomment the line and provide the correct path.
What should be done if the libraries aren't installed? Leave them commented out?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What should be done if the libraries aren't installed? Leave them commented out?

Yes.

if a user already has the libraries installed, they can leave the statements commented out, ONLY IF they're installed in the {EXTERNAL_LIBS} location.

If the libraries are commented out, the script will always attempt build the libraries in the external_libs directory. If the libraries are installed somewhere other than the external_libs directory and the user would like to use those libraries, they will want to uncomment the line and provide the path. If the libraries are installed in the external_libs directory and the user would like to use those libraries, they will want to uncomment the line and leave it as-is. If the libraries are not installed and the user would like the script to install them, they should leave the lines commented out.

Phew, that's kind of a mouthful, let me try to say it better:

Uncomment the external library variables if the libraries are installed in any location and the user would like to make use of those pre-installed libraries. If the libraries are in the external_libs dir, uncomment and do nothing. If the libraries are not in the external_libs dir, uncomment and change the paths to the appropriate location.

Leave the external library variables commented out if the user would like the library/libraries installed in the external_libs subdirectory.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That clears it up a bit, thanks. Given that truth, I would suggest a slight change to the wording to reflect closer to what you've just said,

If users have already installed these libraries and would like to make use of them, uncomment out the export statements. If those pre-existing libraries are in the external_libs directory, no further edits need occur; however, users that have the pre-existing libraries not in the external_libs directory will need to update the paths to the appropriate location.

Does that convey the necessary information well?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@j-opatz, yes that conveys the necessary information well. Thank you for simplifying it! I appreciate it!

I made one slight change to that wording the in the update to the documentation. Instead of "no further edits need occur", I said, "no further edits are needed". If you prefer the original wording that is fine, and please feel free to change it.

Copy link
Contributor

@j-opatz j-opatz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

All updates are in order and looks to provide a viable generic start for install users. All approved.

@jprestop
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@j-opatz Thanks so much for the thorough review and feedback!

@jprestop jprestop merged commit 3086238 into develop Aug 23, 2023
22 checks passed
@jprestop jprestop deleted the feature_2643_generic_install branch August 23, 2023 18:05
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: 🏁 Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Update the install_met_env.generic configuration file
2 participants