We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
We have a good base for CI/CD with https://github.com/ACCESS-NRI/ACCESS-OM2/tree/main/.github/workflows. But this was done without knowing what pieces of the CI/CD are sufficiently generic for each new model. Using a new model will be a good test for how generic we can make certain aspects of the pipeline, which we can then add to https://github.com/ACCESS-NRI/build-cd
Some todos:
config
spack.yaml
spack
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
validate-repo-version
pr-comment
access-om3
If all of the models follow the same spack.yaml structure, this could be simplified massively. See drafted ACCESS-NRI/build-cd#47
Sorry, something went wrong.
CodeGat
Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.
We have a good base for CI/CD with https://github.com/ACCESS-NRI/ACCESS-OM2/tree/main/.github/workflows. But this was done without knowing what pieces of the CI/CD are sufficiently generic for each new model. Using a new model will be a good test for how generic we can make certain aspects of the pipeline, which we can then add to https://github.com/ACCESS-NRI/build-cd
Some todos:
config
spack.yaml
#3spack
-based models easierThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: