How to build an ACCESS model page #821
Conversation
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good @atteggiani! I have made a few suggestions for edits to the text.
Thank you for the reivew @heidinett! |
|
Addressed @harshula's comments (plus some additional ones discussed via chat) in 13506e3c5e8c940d2ffd71ea48a334ce4f1046f4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've read through and they are great. Clear with enough context to make them easily understood. Thanks everyone for the work to get to this point.
My only concern is that we're using ESM1.5 as the example, and so building the UM which has some licensing conditions attached. We're not giving users any indication that they should perhaps be more careful, restrict access or otherwise take steps to avoid violating license conditions.
I don't suppose it is greatly different to existing practice where users checkout source code from the svn mirror, but these instructions are quite prominent.
I think that raises a valid point. |
Yes that sounds like a good idea. It doesn't have to happen in this PR, but for the future it would make sense to have a separate page about UM licensing, how it works, who is eligible and what their responsibilities are. Then we could just refer to it. |
Applied Heidi's comments Addressed Harshula's comments + minor other fixes: - Specified Spack **managed** environments when necessary - Fix output bad formatting in virtual terminals - Changed reference to $(prefix) to point out $spack instead - Changed part for the output formatting to refer to the specific Spack instance installed throught the setup - Changed a 'data="input"' line to 'data="output"' for the virtual terminal related to "spack find mom5" Addressed Harshula and Anton's comments Added Harshula's suggestions.
260fa6d to
c19f50b
Compare
Fixes #743.