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

Add a check to make sure the correct predefined geometry is being used #51

Open
andyprata opened this issue Mar 23, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@andyprata
Copy link
Collaborator

I've done this twice now and maybe it's my own carelessness, but ORAC allows me to run on a geostationary imager using incorrect prelsm_file and pregeo_file entries. For example, I just ran on SEVIRI 41.5 degrees E data using the SEVIRI 0 degrees predefined geometry and no errors or warnings were raised.

I suggest adding a simple check on which satellite/sensor is being used that raises an error if incorrect geometry files are specified in the driver file.

@simonrp84
Copy link
Collaborator

simonrp84 commented Mar 23, 2021

Thinking about it, maybe they user shouldn't have to supply the filenames at all. How about something where you just set ```

use_predef_geo=True
predef_dir=/whatever/

And ORAC figures out the filename. That would prevent this confusion.
I also think we should merge the LSM and GEO files, as I doubt anyone is using one but not the other.

Am happy to take a look at this, but can't promise it'll be any time in the near future!

@adamcpovey
Copy link
Collaborator

Thinking about it, maybe they user shouldn't have to supply the filenames at all. How about something where you just set

I had been hoping to take all of the path calculation out of ORAC. People might want to put files in multiple folders rather than one, or have multiple versions of a file in the same location. And it's harder to explain "have a file called X" rather than "get a file that does Y and tell the program where it is".

However, what you say is easy to do so I shan't stand in the way.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants