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

Change name "Eclipse" to "OPM Flow" #37

Closed
anders-kiaer opened this issue Apr 24, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #63
Closed

Change name "Eclipse" to "OPM Flow" #37

anders-kiaer opened this issue Apr 24, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #63
Assignees
Labels
invalid This doesn't seem right

Comments

@anders-kiaer
Copy link
Collaborator

Author: @wouterjdb

We aim at using Flow - but we still call the simulator "Eclipse" in many places.

@anders-kiaer anders-kiaer added the invalid This doesn't seem right label Apr 24, 2020
@olwijn
Copy link
Collaborator

olwijn commented Jun 18, 2020

The usage of "Eclipse" in the code is mostly restricted to functionality to read from ECLIPSE-formatted simulation output (at this moment actually ECLIPSE simulations). In most other cases it appears in comments in combinations such as "Eclipse/Flow", or clearly refers to a required formatting that follows the 'Eclipse conventions'. In my view such usages are appropriate.

I think replacement of "eclipse" by "flow" is warranted for example in the name of the file location where simulation results appear, since these will be obtained by running Flow. The following code lines were identified where changes shold perhaps be made:

src/flownet/config_parser/_config_parser.py 32
src/flownet/config_parser/_config_parser.py 417
src/flownet/config_parser/_config_parser_pred.py 82
src/flownet/network_model/_generate_connections.py 317, 440, 448 (comment)
src/flownet/realization/_render_realization.py 20 (comment)
src/flownet/templates/common_config.ert.jinja2 29, 31-34

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
invalid This doesn't seem right
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants