Python "FutureWarnings" in EE2 Standards

[AliciaBentley-NOAA]

As more production packages use Python, we are going to start seeing Python "FutureWarning" messages in operational log files. Python "FutureWarning" messages do not indicate a current problem with the production code–they warn about a Python or Python package incompatibility that may cause jobs to fail when a future version of Python or the Python library is used.

Python "FutureWarning" messages should be considered acceptable during the EE2 Review process and in operational log files. Developers should make an effort to address the underlying cause of "FutureWarning" messages, when possible, to prevent jobs from failing in the future. I'd like the EE2 Standards document updated to reflect this.

Please feel free to suggest changes to the wording that I used in this PR. Thanks!

CC @JacobCarley-NOAA @aerorahul @JustinCooke-NCO

[JacobCarley-NOAA]

I think this is a sensible addition and should be included. I do think it would be better as a bullet point under Subsection C of the Standards section (interpreted code).

Don't forget to open an Issue that corresponds to this PR!

[AliciaBentley-NOAA]

@JacobCarley-NOAA Thanks! That makes sense to me. Would you like us to move the new "FutureWarning" text to Section C (Interpreted Code) after the bullet that says "Python version must be at version 3 or higher."? It would look something like:

• Python version must be at version 3 or higher.
• Python “FutureWarning” messages indicate that a specific feature, function, or syntax that is currently being used will be changed or removed in a future version of Python or in a future version of a Python library. Python “FutureWarning” messages are acceptable messages in operations and should not be suppressed. Developers should make an effort to resolve “FutureWarning” messages, when possible, in order to prevent production jobs from failing in the future.

CC @JustinCooke-NCO

[JacobCarley-NOAA]

I think that works great. Thanks!

[AliciaBentley-NOAA]

EE2 standards Issue #20 has been created to capture this.

[JacobCarley-NOAA]

Changes look good and in the right place. This is a logical update to the standards.

[aerorahul]

Looks good to me. I left a comment in the issue on a possible way to reduce the occurrences of repeated FutureWarning without suppressing them while developing the software.
This hopefully will yield less repetition in the logs.