[MITgcm-support] doc/tag-index

[Holly Dail]

Chris and Martin -

Thanks to you both -- really useful to know how things are managed!

Holly

On Aug 5, 2009, at Aug 5 , 11:14 AM, Chris Hill wrote:

> Hi Holly and others,
>
> Since Martin thinks someone is more on top of things than him (which
> I'm not sure is true) I'll say something on
> what we try and do.
>
> We found that a so-called stable release wasn't that interesting to
> most people (even though it sounds
> good on paper and to the managerial oriented). Mostly what people  
> wanted was
> a stable release and the newest features! So we have a system of
> continuous updates
> with a labeling system checkpointNN[a-z]. Generally something that  
> is labelled
> "checkpointNN[a-z]" is doing reasonably well and isn't total junk.
> Increments in the [a-z] letter appear
> on weeks to  months time scales. Increments in the NN suffix appear
> less frequently, months apart
> generally. A checkpointNN thing is usually better tested (especially
> with regard to
> AD features) and usually marks a boundary between more invasive bits
> of development.
>
> Most people take a recent "checkpoinNN[a-z]" thing and then stick
> with that for a while.
> That helps in knowing what you have, being able to reproduce things
> and in asking questions, since
> its clear what you started with. Once a thing is labelled
> checkpointNN[a-z] it is frozen and a
> checkout of checkpointNN[a-z] will always give the same thing.
> Other people take the most recent thing and continually update, but
> thats for the
> more adventurous and fearless folks.
>
> Chris
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Martin Losch<Martin.Losch at awi.de>  
> wrote:
>> Holly,
>>
>> you don't seem to get an answer from those whom I consider more on  
>> top of
>> this issue than I am. I hope that I am not giving away any secrets  
>> about the
>> MITgcm ...
>>
>> doc/tag-index is a reference file where the developers briefly  
>> document
>> their changes in the code; so you are right that it is actually  
>> quite useful
>> for finding out about the status of the MITgcm.
>>
>> There is no "stable" version (there was a Release1 years ago, but  
>> never a
>> second one).
>> The latest code is tested every day and there are a few (unnamed)
>> bloodhounds who will immediately notice any problems with these  
>> tests, so
>> that the latest code is almost always OK for the parts that are  
>> used in the
>> verification experiments (the developers have the strict rule to  
>> only check
>> in modifications after running these tests).
>> The normal user should be fine with the latest code. In fact if you  
>> use it
>> you make sure that you have the latest bug-fixes etc include (but  
>> it also
>> means that you get new code which might contain new bugs). However,  
>> before
>> you update a running project to latest code I advise you to check in
>> tag-index that this update will not change your results (e.g. there  
>> have
>> been major changes in the seaice package around checkpoint61o/p/q/ 
>> r, which
>> do change the results if you use pkg/seaice, but these events are  
>> rare).
>>
>> I guess it is usually safe to use "checkpoints", such as  
>> checkpoint61.
>> Again: we do our best (see above) to have properly working code at  
>> all times
>> and particularly at the time of "tags" (e.g. currently the latest  
>> tag is
>> checkpoint61t).
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 11:25 PM, Holly Dail wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all -
>>>
>>> When I do a fresh checkout from the CVS, I'm never sure I'm  
>>> getting a
>>> reasonable version.  After recent mentions of doc/tag-index I  
>>> looked at it
>>> for the first time -- it looks like a useful way to find  
>>> reasonably stable
>>> versions to focus on.  Is checking out the most recent checkpoint  
>>> mentioned
>>> in that file my best bet?  Do all developers update it or is it  
>>> sporadic?
>>>
>>> Thanks -
>>> Holly
>>>
>>> PS I was going to ask how to search the archives, because its been
>>> plaguing me.  And then I thought of trying Google:
>>> site:http://forge.csail.mit.edu/pipermail/mitgcm-support my question
>>> Thought I'd mention it in case anyone else misses the obvious too.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MITgcm-support mailing list
>>> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MITgcm-support mailing list
>> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-support mailing list
> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support