Feature 3 python3.8.6

[jprestop]

Pull Request Testing

• Describe testing already performed for these changes:
  

Created a docker image for this MET base image:
docker build -t dtcenter/met-base:v1.1 -f Dockerfile .

Created a docker image for MET based on this base image (from my feature_2196_update_dockerfile branch in MET with updates for Python 3.8.6):

export TAG_NAME=test_py3.8
export BRANCH_NAME=feature_2196_update_dockerfile
docker build -t dtcenter/met:${TAG_NAME} --build-arg SOURCE_BRANCH=${BRANCH_NAME} -f internal/scripts/docker/Dockerfile.copy .

Created a docker data volume from the met_tool_wrapper input data:
docker create --name met_tool_wrapper dtcenter/metplus-data:4.0-met_tool_wrapper

Ran the MET docker image with the data:
docker run --rm -it --volumes-from met_tool_wrapper dtcenter/met:test_py3.8 /bin/bash

Ran a Python Embedding case:

mkdir /data/output
/usr/local/bin/plot_data_plane PYTHON_NUMPY /data/output/py_embed_fcst.ps 'name="/usr/local/share/met/python/read_ascii_numpy.py /data/input/METplus_Data/met_test/data/python/fcst.txt  FCST";' -title "Python Embedding FCST" -v 1

and verified it was successful.

• Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:
  
  Review the files changed. Could check out the branches and run the commands above, but GHA will also do the necessary work to test.

• Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [No documentation currently exists, coming in Contributor's Guide]

• Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes]

• Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [No]
  
  If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:
  

• Please complete this pull request review by [20220901].
  

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

• Review the source issue metadata (required labels, projects, and milestone).
• Complete the PR definition above.
• Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
• Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow.
  Select: Reviewer(s)
  Select: Organization level software support Project or Repository level development cycle Project
  Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes
• After submitting the PR, select Development issue with the original issue number.
• After the PR is approved, merge your changes. If permissions do not allow this, request that the reviewer do the merge.
• Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

[JohnHalleyGotway]

@jprestop I propose that we renameMET_BASE_IMAGE as MET_BASE_TAG. That would be most consistent with the terminology used in the output of docker images.

REPOSITORY                    TAG       IMAGE ID       CREATED         SIZE
dtcenter/met-base-unit-test   latest    126e6e5d5931   2 hours ago     2.74GB
dtcenter/met-base             latest    ed1b655d4538   3 hours ago     1.59GB
dtcenter/met-base             v1.1      ed1b655d4538   3 hours ago     1.59GB
centos                        7         eeb6ee3f44bd   11 months ago   204MB

In docker run ONE:TWO the thing that comes before the : is the REPOSITORY and the thing after the : is the TAG. Might as well stick with those.

[jprestop]

@JohnHalleyGotway Thanks for showing that example. I see what you are talking about and agree that is a good change to make to be consistent with the "docker images" output terminology. I have made that change, re-tagged, and can see that a GHA action is running now.

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Thanks Julie. I approve of these changes.