@Kristen Krumhardt and I are meeting tomorrow morning to put together a PR with her latest tunings for CESM 2.2 with coccolithophores. Currently, the defaults/ directory contains
$ ls -1 settings_* settings_cesm2.0.yaml settings_cesm2.1+cocco.yaml settings_cesm2.1.yaml settings_latest.yaml
My preference is to put her 3-autotroph tunings into settings_latest.yaml (rather than change the name of that file), and create settings_with_cocco.yaml for the cocco settings. Does that seem reasonable? Some thoughts:
settings_cesm2.2+cocco.yaml (though "past precedence" refers to a time when we only had settings_latest to think about)settings_latest+cocco.yaml that rubs me the wrong way. I think it's the idea of having two different files claiming to be latest? I can't quite put my finger on why I dislike it, I just don't like it.settings_with_cocco.yaml, then maybe I should rename settings_cesm2.1+cocco.yaml to settings_cesm2.1_with_cocco.yaml; I don't think that would be terribly difficult, though when I update POP to use the new MARBL tag it'll require some minor tweaks to config_component.xml and namelist_defaults_pop.xmldefaults/ directory also contains diagnostics_latest.yaml, hence the generic directory name.If we do decide to combine the tunings into a single file, I'll bring in the current tunings as settings_with_cocco.yaml and open a new issue ticket to combine the cocco settings files (both for the 2.1 settings and the new ones) after settings_latest.yaml gets updated
Last updated: May 16 2025 at 17:14 UTC