[x] This PR addresses an already opened issue (for bug fixes / features)
This PR fixes #87
[x] (If applicable) Documentation has been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
[x] This PR does not seem to break the templates.
[x] HISTORY.rst has been updated (with summary of main changes)
[x] Link to issue (:issue:number) and pull request (:pull:number) has been added
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Slightly going back from #87, period is always a list, while periods is more flexible.
A new function utils.standardize_periods to always have the same formatting.
Added a coverage_kwargs to search_data_catalogs to add a way to modify the default arguments of subset_file_coverage
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
The one breaking change is the renaming of simulation_period. Since it is both positional and required, I don't see a way to safely replace it by simulation_periods.
The notebook currently fails because of the breaking change, you can ignore that. That being said, I'm open to suggestions on ways to circumvent that breaking change.
Pull Request Checklist:
number
) and pull request (:pull:number
) has been addedWhat kind of change does this PR introduce?
period
is always a list, whileperiods
is more flexible.utils.standardize_periods
to always have the same formatting.coverage_kwargs
tosearch_data_catalogs
to add a way to modify the default arguments ofsubset_file_coverage
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
simulation_period
. Since it is both positional and required, I don't see a way to safely replace it bysimulation_periods
.Other information: