Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow building of the ufs-weather-model for GFS, GEFS, SFS in the same clone of global-workflow #3098

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

aerorahul
Copy link
Contributor

Description

GFS and GEFS (and now SFS) uses different compile time options for the UFS-weather-model. For the purposes of CI testing, a multi-build pipeline under Jenkins was created by @TerrenceMcGuinness-NOAA. This served well, until now. With the inclusion of SFS, a third variety of the model is being built. Under the multi-build pipeline paradigm, a second (or third) clone and build of the global-workflow is required. This adds cloning and compilation time of the global-workflow.

This PR allows compiling the ufs-weather-model in a single clone of the global-workflow. The compiled executables based on the options for GFS, GEFS, and SFS results in a model executable as gfs_model.x, gefs_model.x, and sfs_model.x. The forecast script uses the right executable.

Further work is required for differentiating the WW3 pre/post executables and will be carried out in a future PR.
Also, further work is required in the multi-build pipeline of Jenkins to use a single HOMEgfs and building the other variants in that space. This will also be carried out in a later PR.

Type of change

  • New feature (adds functionality)
  • Maintenance (code refactor, clean-up, new CI test, etc.)

Change characteristics

This PR does not update any submodules.

How has this been tested?

In progress

Checklist

  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published
  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have documented my code, including function, input, and output descriptions
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • New and existing tests pass with my changes
  • This change is covered by an existing CI test or a new one has been added
  • Any new scripts have been added to the .github/CODEOWNERS file with owners
  • I have made corresponding changes to the system documentation if necessary

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant