Skip to content

A fix for fire initializations in halo region, plus a fix for weather-model failure in debug compile mode#5

Merged
pedro-jm merged 5 commits intoNOAA-EMC:emc/developfrom
NCAR:PR_30
May 4, 2026
Merged

A fix for fire initializations in halo region, plus a fix for weather-model failure in debug compile mode#5
pedro-jm merged 5 commits intoNOAA-EMC:emc/developfrom
NCAR:PR_30

Conversation

@mkavulich
Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR brings in commits from NCAR#30. Most of these are related to WRF-FIRE, but there is one potential impact on the UFS coupling: previously the halo regions of a fire perimeter were not initialized correctly, so if you specified an initial fire perimeter that extended into a halo region, that part of the ignition would not work (spot ignitions still work fine). Specifically the commit that fixes this bug is here.

@pedro-jm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@mkavulich thanks! I approve this PR.

@mkavulich
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Note: This PR now includes a bugfix from @DeniseWorthen, addressing NCAR#31

@mkavulich mkavulich changed the title A fix for fire initializations in halo region A fix for fire initializations in halo region, plus a fix for weather-model failure in debug compile mode Apr 29, 2026
mkavulich added a commit to mkavulich/ufs-weather-model that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2026
@gspetro-NOAA
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@pedro-jm Could you review & approve this PR (but NOT merge it yet)?

@gspetro-NOAA
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@mkavulich I'm not seeing the hash from the top of NOAA-EMC/firebehavior emc/develop, which is 1e1fab9.

@mkavulich
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@gspetro-NOAA This PR is coming from NCAR/fire_behavior, which has different history compared to this repository.

@pedro-jm pedro-jm self-requested a review April 29, 2026 20:36
@pedro-jm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@gspetro-NOAA I approve this PR, I coordinate with Michael already. I tried to do a forma review approval but I did not find how to do it. So hopefully this comment is sufficient to approve.

Thanks for the reminder of not to merge! :).

@gspetro-NOAA
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@gspetro-NOAA I approve this PR, I coordinate with Michael already. I tried to do a forma review approval but I did not find how to do it. So hopefully this comment is sufficient to approve.

Thanks for the reminder of not to merge! :).

Np! 🙂 This should be sufficient. Tho if you have permissions to merge, you probably have permissions to formally approve. To do that, you go to the "Files changed" tab, click on Submit review, select approve, and then click "Submit review." Just fyi :)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@pedro-jm pedro-jm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good. I approve.

@gspetro-NOAA
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@pedro-jm Please go ahead and merge this PR. WM testing completed successfully.

@gspetro-NOAA
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@pedro-jm / @masih-e / @danrosen25 Could one of you merge this PR?

@pedro-jm pedro-jm merged commit 23a6e57 into NOAA-EMC:emc/develop May 4, 2026
@pedro-jm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

pedro-jm commented May 4, 2026

@gspetro-NOAA I just merge it.

@danrosen25
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@pedro-jm
Any thoughts on switching the default branch at https://github.com/NCAR/fire_behavior to develop instead of main. It's hard to tell if NOAA-EMC and NCAR are diverging. When I took a quick look I can tell that there's at least one line in this PR that differs from the changes made to NCAR.

https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/fire_behavior/pull/5/changes#diff-0ef833106a4fdb6f3ff58cfdafcecd6c013becdfdb1d4d28cc4d7bda7749628cR176

@pedro-jm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

pedro-jm commented May 4, 2026

@danrosen25 I am fine changing the default branch to develop if you think that is the best. Please go ahead and do the change. Thanks.

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.

4 participants