Skip to content

Release 1.6.1#1035

Merged
rhattersley merged 2 commits into
SciTools:v1.6.xfrom
esc24:release1.6.1
Feb 18, 2014
Merged

Release 1.6.1#1035
rhattersley merged 2 commits into
SciTools:v1.6.xfrom
esc24:release1.6.1

Conversation

@esc24

@esc24 esc24 commented Feb 18, 2014

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This PR updates the versions in init.py, setup.py and the what's new page for the 1.6.1 release. I tagged between the two commits.

@rhattersley

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you consider mentioning the change in PP and GRIB forecast_period handling in the "Incompatible changes" section?

@esc24

esc24 commented Feb 18, 2014

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

It didn't get a mention in 1.6.0, so I didn't add it but things have change significantly now it's a bounded quantity. I'll happily take a suggestion and add it in. How about:

When a cube is loaded from PP or GRIB and it has both time and forecast period 
coordinates, and the time coordinate has bounds, the forecast period coordinate 
will now also have bounds. These bounds will be aligned with the bounds of the 
time coordinate taking into account the forecast reference time.

@rhattersley

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I like that - it's a very good start. 👍

The forecast period point has moved as well. It used to be at the end/start for PP/GRIB. Now it's in the middle to be consistent with the time point. My tweak is in bold:

When a cube is loaded from PP or GRIB and it has both time and forecast period coordinates, and the time coordinate has bounds, the forecast period coordinate will now also have bounds. These bounds will be aligned with the bounds of the time coordinate taking into account the forecast reference time. Also, the forecast period point will now be aligned with the time point.

@esc24

esc24 commented Feb 18, 2014

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I've added that into the first commit and tagged using git tag -a v1.6.1 c5099d24bbc287e8242abb7df31c0f3947bb913a -m "Iris v1.6.1 - 18 February 2014"

@esc24

esc24 commented Feb 18, 2014

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Anyone care to merge this so I can push the 1.6.1 tag up? Any objections?

@rhattersley

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Looks good. Just checking the built docs...

rhattersley added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 18, 2014
@rhattersley rhattersley merged commit 9cf8612 into SciTools:v1.6.x Feb 18, 2014
@rhattersley

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Anyone care to merge this so I can push the 1.6.1 tag up?

Go for it!

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.

2 participants