Repository navigation
Conversation
|
Page 178 of the 2nd addition of NR just lists mathematical equations and doesn't have code that goes with it. |
slevis-lmwg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Erik and I talked about making it clear that
- this code is specific to aerosols at the moment and
- we will use in 1850 cases
...by updating the tool name and by including info in the docstrings.
|
@slevis-lmwg and I met and went over some of the big picture stuff with this one. I'm going to rebase this one to b4b-dev. Because the thing in here now is just the script to handle aerosols. Then once on b4b-dev I'll create the file and make a new PR that brings in the CDEPS update to point to the new file. |
|
Rebasing to b4b-dev still included the update to ctsm5.4.063. This is even though the branch was started before ctsm5.4.063 was done. This is the kind of case I would think the rebase would work on. But, looking at the branch it didn't include the merge commit which is likely the problem here. So I'll remove the changes to bring the new script in and leave this here for the CDEPS changes that will be coming. I'll cherry-pick my commits on this branch to a new branch started off of b4b-dev and then that will have just the new dataset changes. Or alturnatively if I include the merge commit in the branch, the rebase should function normally... |
ctsm5.4.063: Move CTSM tests from t232 to t233 Updating testlist_clm.xml, ExpectedTestFails.xml, config_compsets.xml, and documentation that needs updating. NB: Moving tests from t232 to t233 but postpone the change for LII2 tests (issue ESCOMP#4245). Changes answers relative to the baseline, only for cases with grids that changed to the t233 grid, and only due to the grid update. PR ESCOMP#4223 Resolves issue ESCOMP#4238 by removing NorESM test Contributes to ESCOMP#2540 Move testing from POP to MOM masks
7bcb2ed to
9bd6ad5
Compare
Is this on the correct PR? |
|
@ekluzek is this ready for testing / review, or still in progress |
slevis-lmwg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm ok with keeping as three separate PRs (aerosol, o3, co2) or merging as one PR. Erik and I agreed that it's probably safest to do the minimum required changes and leave aspirational/exploratory ideas for a separate PR to avoid delays.
Description of changes
Update 1850 compsets to point to the new CMIP7 CO2, aerosols to the latest climatology from the coupled spinup simulations.
Base it on this simulation:
NCAR/LMWG_dev#183
This replaces #4008
Specific notes
Contributors other than yourself, if any
CTSM issues resolved or otherwise addressed, if any:
If answers are expected to change, describe (delete this line otherwise):
Yes! for all 1850 compsets
Any user interface changes (namelist or namelist defaults changes)?
namelist changes for DATM
Testing planned or performed, if any:
Requirements before merge: