[rrfs-nco] Add a clear WARNING message for missing RAVE data

[ShunLiu-NOAA]

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:

• Add a clear WARNING message for missing RAVE data based on Wei and Jame's suggestion.

TESTS CONDUCTED:

Machines/Platforms:

• WCOSS2
  • Cactus/Dogwood
  • Acorn
• RDHPCS
  • Hera
  • Jet
  • Orion
  • Hercules

Test cases:

• Engineering tests
  • Non-DA engineering test
  • DA engineering test
    • Retro
    • Ensemble
    • Parallel
• RRFS fire weather
• RRFS_A:
• RRFS_B:
• RTMA:
• Others:

ISSUE:

• Fixes the issue(s) mentioned in #9999

CONTRIBUTORS (optional):

[MatthewPyle-NOAA]

@ShunLiu-NOAA there are other warning prints in the python code. I started some work on it (on dogwood) as /lfs/h2/emc/lam/noscrub/Matthew.Pyle/rrfs-workflow_ravefix/ush/generate_fire_emissions.py, but haven't finished it yet.

[ShunLiu-NOAA]

@ShunLiu-NOAA there are other warning prints in the python code. I started some work on it (on dogwood) as /lfs/h2/emc/lam/noscrub/Matthew.Pyle/rrfs-workflow_ravefix/ush/generate_fire_emissions.py, but haven't finished it yet.

@MatthewPyle-NOAA , @WeiWei-NCO and @JamesPolly-NCO , Will it be clear enough if we only give one WARNING from "exrrfs_process_smoke.sh"?

[JamesPolly-NCO]

@ShunLiu-NOAA thank you for checking. We recently made some changes to the process_smoke jobs that result in both an email and warning messages in the output job log (example path shown below). I personally feel that no more functionality is needed here given these updates.

/lfs/h1/ops/test/output/20260623/rrfs_det_process_smoke_spinup_03.o270526814

[ShunLiu-NOAA]

@JamesPolly-NCO To clarify, does generate_fire_emissions.py handle the warning adequately on its own, meaning we don't need to update exrrfs_process_smoke.sh? Additionally, I don't think we need to email this warning message to the team. The workflow should continue running successfully even without this job.

[JamesPolly-NCO]

@ShunLiu-NOAA Let's separate your concerns:

• Matt merged PR [rrfs-nco] Adds warning for no RAVE data being available, and clarifies other warnings. #1522 last week and I feel that these changes are enough such that we don't need to update exrrfs_process_smoke.sh any further to address "data of opportunity" warnings.
• At present, we are sometimes emailing when data of opportunity is missing, and sometimes we are not. I think we should address this inconsistency in a separate issue, and get input from @WeiWei-NCO

[ShunLiu-NOAA]

Thanks for the clarification. I'll go ahead and close this PR.