[MITgcm-devel] Comment on "recent changes"

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hello Ed,

I disagree with your last check-in:
(aim.5l_cs/input/data & aim.5l_cs/input.thSI/data)
because it makes harder for users who start with this set-up and
parameter files, and want to do a longer simulation with mnc,
to know what they need to change (because I assume that they
don't want to duplicate the output, and before turning on mnc,
will have to remove/comment the line you just added).
This is what I think (but might not be the only one to think
like this).
And if, for the purpose of testing, you need do have both
MDSIO & MNC output files, why don't you add this just in your
own version ?

And to come back to the 1rst thing of this morning:
> It's just a detail, but it helps to clarify what has been modified
> in the code, when only modified files are checked-in
> (on the cvs webb, diagnostics_readparms.F, diff between version
> 1.13 and 1.12: - No changes -)
and your answer:
> With CVS, its basically impossible to check in a change thats a zero-
> diff.  It just doesn't work.  So, what you're complaining about is a
> failure of the ViewCVS program to correctly parse and display the
> difference.
I was not complaining about a cvs failure, but really that I find
easier to follow the changes that have been made in 1 file, when
only modified files are checked-in (I mean, not just blanks added
or removed from place to place, but true modifications), especially
when the cvs-commit message does not describe what has been changed.
(In this particular case, diagnostics_readparms.F, I would have expected
 something like: "add blanks to look nicer").

Jean-Michel