GEOS-ESM / GEOS-ESM/GEOSgcm_GridComp

AGCM topo_* files and make_bcs

Open
#523 12 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Fortran
Stars
10
Forks
13
Avg merge
17h 35m
Merged PRs (30d)
14

Description

This issue is a follow-up from #517 and is beyond the scope of #517. Please add future comments on this topic here and not in #517.

  1. Which package creates the AGCM's topo_* files?
  2. Why is the generation of the topo_* files is separate from make_bcs?
  3. Shouldn't the two sets of files be created as part of the same package and (ideally) use the same topo source data?

In the past, I pointed out potential inconsistencies between the topo_* files and the topography data underlying the Catchment parameter files, but I'm not aware of any follow-up.

Something for the modeling group to keep in mind.

Originally posted by @gmao-rreichle in https://github.com/GEOS-ESM/GEOSgcm_GridComp/issues/517#issuecomment-1015875367

cc: @mathomp4 @sanAkel @biljanaorescanin @atrayano @bena-nasa @wmputman @sdrabenh

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by identifying which package creates the AGCM topo_* files and where make_bcs is implemented. Compare the source data used by both workflows and review the reported potential inconsistencies. Done means documenting the relationship and agreeing whether the generation should be unified.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
fortran
Domain
data
Issue type
Refactor
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
20/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.