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

Using private grid._depth for negating depth #75

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 6, 2024

Conversation

erikvansebille
Copy link
Member

As Parcels v3.1.0 has moved from grid.depth to grid._depth, the code for VirtualShip is now broken.

This PR fixes that, although a more proper implementation would be to add a grid.negate_depth() method to Parcels itself?

erikvansebille and others added 2 commits October 31, 2024 18:56
As Parcels v3.1.0 has moved from `grid.depth` to `grid._depth`, the code for VirtualShip is now broken. THis PR fixes that, although a more propoer implementation would be to add a grid.negate_depth() method to Parcels itself?
@erikvansebille
Copy link
Member Author

The other issue that causes the CI to fail is not easily fixed within virtualship; it has to do with a bug in a new warning in Parcels, see OceanParcels/Parcels#1747.

In any case, because it's 'only a warning', it doesn't affect the functionality of virtualship. We probably have to wait until Parcels is patched, @VeckoTheGecko?

@erikvansebille erikvansebille merged commit 6f843e9 into main Nov 6, 2024
4 of 10 checks passed
@erikvansebille erikvansebille deleted the fix_negate_depth_code branch November 6, 2024 07:05
iuryt added a commit to iuryt/virtualship that referenced this pull request Nov 11, 2024
Using private grid._depth for negating depth (OceanParcels#75)
@VeckoTheGecko
Copy link
Collaborator

@erikvansebille I wonder if a better solution would be to pin parcels<3.1.0 for the timebeing? That way we can implement .negate_depth and fix the warnings in parcels without having to push out a new release, and virtualship can be good to go for students.

@erikvansebille
Copy link
Member Author

Yes I agree; pinning to <3.1.0 (or even 'not 3.1.0'; is that possible?) might be a better solution. Can you implement?

@ammedd
Copy link
Collaborator

ammedd commented Nov 12, 2024

Just so you know. There is no rush to fix things for virtual ship. I plan to have the next group of students working with the code early February.

VeckoTheGecko added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2024
VeckoTheGecko added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2024
@VeckoTheGecko VeckoTheGecko mentioned this pull request Nov 12, 2024
VeckoTheGecko added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 13, 2024
VeckoTheGecko added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 13, 2024
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