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

refactor(gwe-est): remove packagedata block and put values in options block #1882

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Jun 21, 2024

Conversation

emorway-usgs
Copy link
Contributor

  • Added new test or modified an existing test
  • Ran black on new or modified autotests
  • Formatted new and modified Fortran source files with fprettify
  • Updated definition files
  • Updated develop.tex with a plain-language description of the bug fix, change, feature; required for changes that may affect users
  • Updated input and output guide

For additional information see instructions for contributing and instructions for developing.

Copy link
Contributor

@langevin-usgs langevin-usgs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for doing this. I think this is a cleaner implementation. My only comment would be to consider renaming the keywords to HEAT_CAPACITY_WATER and DENSITY_WATER. You can leave the internal fortran variables the same (by setting mf6internal in the definition file entries).

doc/mf6io/mf6ivar/examples/gwe-est-example.dat Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
doc/mf6io/mf6ivar/examples/gwe-est-example.dat Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
emorway-usgs added a commit to emorway-usgs/modflow6 that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2024
@emorway-usgs
Copy link
Contributor Author

... consider renaming the keywords to HEAT_CAPACITY_WATER and DENSITY_WATER. You can leave the internal fortran variables the same (by setting mf6internal in the definition file entries).

I'm fine with this change, I considered longer names to begin with but opted for the shorter names initially. Thanks for the suggestion.

Copy link
Contributor

@langevin-usgs langevin-usgs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey @emorway-usgs, just a few more comments to think about.

doc/ReleaseNotes/develop.tex Show resolved Hide resolved
doc/mf6io/mf6ivar/dfn/gwe-est.dfn Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
doc/mf6io/mf6ivar/dfn/gwe-est.dfn Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
doc/mf6io/mf6ivar/examples/gwe-est-example.dat Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
emorway-usgs added a commit to emorway-usgs/modflow6 that referenced this pull request Jun 20, 2024
emorway-usgs added a commit to emorway-usgs/modflow6 that referenced this pull request Jun 20, 2024
@emorway-usgs emorway-usgs merged commit 37a3805 into MODFLOW-USGS:develop Jun 21, 2024
17 of 18 checks passed
emorway-usgs added a commit to MODFLOW-USGS/modflow6-examples that referenced this pull request Jun 21, 2024
…ock (#212)

updating calls to `flopy.mf6.ModflowGweest()` to reflect the recent changes to the input structure of the Energy Storage and Transfer (EST) package.  See #1882 on the main MODFLOW 6 repo (MODFLOW-USGS/modflow6#1882)
@emorway-usgs emorway-usgs deleted the refact_gweest branch June 21, 2024 20:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
code refactor Nonfunctional changes documentation Documentation changes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants