CCPP Framework Meeting Minutes 2019 01 03

Dynamic versus static build:

• NUOPC may not be compatible with CCPP dynamic build or at least require significant work
• dynamic build not needed for NCAR (multi-suite approach suffices)
• GMTB to follow up with sponsors whether the dynamic build should be supported in the future or not; this should happen after the acceptance of the CCPP into the VLAB master to avoid too many "last minute" changes
• use of cdata incompatible with Steve's development; either have to invest to make it work so that NEMSfv3gfs and SCM can profit form the development, or remove cdata (possible for the static build, maybe not for the dynamic build)
• related: need to avoid drifting of the two different build systems (ccpp_prebuild.py and cap_gen.py), don't want another WRF-ARW vs WRF-NMM situation
• challenge: solution needed for timestep initialization that enables processing of all data (e.g., when data from different threads are not contiguous)

Duplicate information in model namelist and suite definition file:

• currently, model namelist for NEMSfv3gfs and suite definition file must be consistent, for instance: use of Thompson MP in SDF requires setting imp_physics=8 in namelist
• possible solution: extend SDF schema so that add namelist parameters can be added to suite definition file and parts of the namelist can be auto-generated (e.g. imp_physics)

Wiki todo:

• add requirements document
• add coding standards document
• add meeting minutes page
• testing instructions for NEMSfv3gfs on Cheyenne to be done before creating PRs
• development workflow: add information on how we are doing development now