-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
disable ACE scaled alerts per radiation working group #2
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -33,13 +33,16 @@ set block = "/home/mta/Snap/.scs107alert" | |
| endif | ||
|
|
||
| if (! -s $block) then | ||
| echo "This message sent to sot_red_alert" >> $lock | ||
| cat $lock | mailx -s ACE_p3_scaled sot_red_alert | ||
| #echo "This message sent to sot_yellow_alert" >> $lock | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This commented out line is different from the original, which is confusing. In general, now that you are using a version control system that makes it easy to track not only the code changes but also provide detailed commentary on the how and why, it's better to not leave old lines of code as comments. The github-workflow way to do this is to put a summary of the radiation working group decision into the pull request discussion (complete with links to the twiki page), along with a short (could be one or two line) summary of what was done in the code to effect the change. |
||
| #cat $lock | mailx -s ACE_p3_scaled sot_yellow_alert | ||
| cat $lock | mailx -s ACE_p3_scaled brad | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Nothing in flight code should be hardwired to a specific person ( |
||
| endif | ||
| if ( -s $block) then | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Why isn't this an |
||
| echo "This message sent to sot_yellow_alert" >> $lock | ||
| cat $lock | mailx -s ACE_p3_scaled sot_yellow_alert | ||
| #echo "This message sent to sot_yellow_alert" >> $lock | ||
| #cat $lock | mailx -s ACE_p3_scaled sot_yellow_alert | ||
| cat $lock | mailx -s ACE_p3_scaled brad | ||
| endif | ||
| #cat $lock | mailx -s ACE_p3_scaled brad | ||
|
|
||
| endif | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -268,14 +268,14 @@ if (i > 0 && ie > 0){ | |
| #if (P130f > 360000000.) { | ||
| if (P5_P3f > 120000000.) { | ||
| val = sprintf("%.4e", P5_P3f) #P5 | ||
| command = "/data/mta4/space_weather/aceviolation_protonsP5.csh " val | ||
| #command = "/data/mta4/space_weather/aceviolation_protonsP5.csh " val | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It looks like you have introduced a bug here by using the "comment out" technique. Two lines down it will still run When you delete the code block(s) then put an informative commit message like "Deleted code that issues scaled p5 and p6 alerts". Then it is clearly in the history and if you ever need to see what that code was you can easily identify where to look. |
||
| #test command = "echo P5 viol " val | ||
| system (command) | ||
| } # if (P5_P3f > 120000000.) system (command) | ||
| } else { # trust P6 | ||
| if (P6_P3f > 120000000.) { | ||
| val = sprintf("%.4e", P6_P3f) #P6 | ||
| command = "/data/mta4/space_weather/aceviolation_protonsP6.csh " val | ||
| #command = "/data/mta4/space_weather/aceviolation_protonsP6.csh " val | ||
| #test command = "echo P6 viol " val | ||
| system (command) | ||
| } # if (P6_P3f > 120000000.) system (command) | ||
|
|
||
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.
@bspitzbart - it looks like you started adding an entirely different patch, which is the SCS107 lockout. It's really much better if you do one functional change per pull request, particularly since the original was simple and didn't really require testing (vs. this update which will need to be tested). Maybe including this update was accidental?