<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><br></div><div>Hi Michael,</div><div><br></div>Thanks for the heads up on the reintegrate option. Just a note to anyone reading, the reintegrate option essentially renders the branch unusable (which is fine because it was merged).<div><br></div><div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 10px/normal Helvetica; ">In Subversion 1.5, once a --reintegrate merge is done from branch to trunk, the branch is no longer usable for further work. It's not able to correctly absorb new trunk changes, nor can it be properly reintegrated to trunk again. For this reason, if you want to keep working on your feature branch, we recommend destroying it and then re-creating it from the trunk:</div></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Todd</div><div><br><div><div>On May 4, 2010, at 3:35 PM, Michael Duda wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Hi, Todd.<br><br>Nice work on the branch update. I checked out the new<br>lateral_boundary_conditions branch and compared with with the copy<br>that I had merged using the tool from CGD, and everything matches<br>except for the top-level Makefile (EXPAND_LEVELS is commented) and<br>the namelist.input.ocean file. The new experience with merging<br>branches should certainly make our lives easier in future.<br><br>I think we may need to use the svn option --reintegrate when<br>adding changes from a branch back into the trunk, according to the<br>svn documentation at the bottom of p.93 here:<br><a href="http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn-book.pdf">http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn-book.pdf</a> Perhaps that<br>option would resolve some of the tree conflicts, which aren't<br>actually conflicts?<br><br>In any case, assuming we get identical results from the sw and<br>hyd_atmos cores, I'd be fine with merging the branch changes back<br>into the trunk.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Michael<br><br><br>On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:43:23PM -0600, Todd Ringler wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Hi Michael,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">After the merge of the trunk to the lateral_boundary_conditions <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">branch, I went to the trunk and issued the command<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">svn merge --dry-run -r 160:HEAD <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="https://svn-mpas-model.cgd.ucar.edu/branches/lateral_boundary_conditions">https://svn-mpas-model.cgd.ucar.edu/branches/lateral_boundary_conditions</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">that resulted in the following:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">--- Merging r161 through r243 into '.':<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/core_hyd_atmos/module_advection.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/core_hyd_atmos/module_time_integration.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/core_sw/Registry<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/core_sw/module_time_integration.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"> C src/core_sw/module_vector_reconstruction.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/registry/gen_inc.c<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">C src/core_ocean/module_test_cases.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">C src/core_ocean/Registry<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">C src/core_ocean/module_time_integration.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"> C src/core_ocean/module_vector_reconstruction.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/framework/module_io_input.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/framework/module_io_output.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/framework/module_block_decomp.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">U src/framework/module_dmpar.F<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"> C src/operators<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">C namelist.input.ocean<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Summary of conflicts:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"> Text conflicts: 4<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"> Tree conflicts: 3<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">There are no conflicts within the framework or within the hyd_atmos. <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">The conflicts in the sw model are due to issues with the <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">reconstruction being moved into the operators directory (these account <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">for all three tree conflicts) -- this is easily fixed. The text <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">conflicts in the ocean core are by design, we made some changes to the <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">solver.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Mark Petersen will now do the evaluation of the branch code. I expect <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">bit-for-bit in the shallow-water model and the hydrostatic core and <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">will verify this. I will also clean up the minor conflicts.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Assuming that Mark's evaluation is positive and that I can verify bit- <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">for-bit in the sw and hyd cores, is there any reason to delay <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">committing this to the trunk sometime later this week?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Cheers,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Todd<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On May 4, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Michael Duda wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi, Todd.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On the topic of merging, I think I've learned something here. I had<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">been using a tool developed by someone in CGD (at the time) that is<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">used by several of the WRF developers, but it's good to know more <br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">about<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the merge built into svn.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Your plan sounds good to me -- once you've committed the updates to <br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">branch, it should be much simpler to see the differences before <br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">merging<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the branch back to the trunk.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cheers,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Michael<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 11:31:46AM -0600, Todd Ringler wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi Michael,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Based on some tips from Mark Petersen, I have done an svn merge from<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the trunk to the lateral boundary branch as<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">svn merge --dry-run -r 160:240<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="https://svn-mpas-model.cgd.ucar.edu/trunk/mpas">https://svn-mpas-model.cgd.ucar.edu/trunk/mpas</a> . (see what would<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">change)<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">svn merge -r 60:240 <a href="https://svn-mpas-model.cgd.ucar.edu/trunk/">https://svn-mpas-model.cgd.ucar.edu/trunk/</a><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">mpas . (merge trunk onto branch)<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">(supposedly) this merges the repository at .../trunk/mpas at rev 240<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">(which is the head) onto the branch that was created at rev 160. I am<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">testing this code right now. Note that the "dry-run" option tells us<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">what changes without actually doing the merge.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Having not done this before, I am learning as I go -- so suggestions<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">are welcome.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Once I think I have the merge done correctly, I will commit the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">changes to the branch -- at that point we should be able to identify<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the changes that would occur by merging the branch to the trunk.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cheers,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Todd<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On May 4, 2010, at 11:05 AM, Michael Duda wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi, Todd.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Actually, I've only made minimal changes to the hydrostatic<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">atmosphere core to handle the 'garbage' cell nCells+1; but, those<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">changes don't appear to have any negative effects.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I think one step that could help us in testing would be to bring<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the lateral_boundary_conditions up to date with respect to the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">trunk, so that the differences in the branch are exactly those we<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">will be proposing to make to the trunk. I've just started<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">experimenting with a diff tool yesterday evening, so I could try<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">to produce a set up updates to the branch that would bring it up<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">to date, and I could place those updates somewhere accessible to<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">other developers; if those updates pass inspection, I could commit<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">them. Does this sound like a reasonable approach?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cheers,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Michael<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 04:38:44PM -0600, Todd Ringler wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi All,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">We have been working on a clean implementation of lateral boundary<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">conditions for a while now. Michael and I put together a design and<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">requirement document on the top that was circulated for comments.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">As near I can tell, we have successfully implemented this design in<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the shallow-water model and in the ocean model. Changes committed <br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">by<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Michael lead me to think that the design has also been pushed into<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">hydrostatic atmosphere model.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Over the next couple of days Mark Petersen will be doing a review <br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">and<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">testing of the code under the lateral_boundary_conditions. His <br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">focus<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">will be on the ocean model component. Over the last couple of weeks<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Mat Maltrud has been testing the shallow-water core with realistic<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">boundaries. All of this testing has occurred in "MPI-mode" on<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">numerous<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">different platforms.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Some of the changes in this design occur under frameworks, so the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">push<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">back to the trunk will impact all model components when rebuilt. As<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">far as we can tell, these changes are innocuous to those not<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">enforcing<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">lateral boundary conditions.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">A quick comparison of the shallow-water models in the branch and in<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the trunk show agreement out to ~12 digits after 500 time steps in<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">test case #5.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I am asking for suggestions in terms of testing and evaluation. We<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">would like to merge this branch with the trunk very soon, but we <br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">want<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">to be careful not to adversely impact the broader development <br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">effort.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cheers,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Todd<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">mpas-developers mailing list<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu">mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu</a><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpas-developers">http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpas-developers</a><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">mpas-developers mailing list<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu">mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu</a><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpas-developers">http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpas-developers</a><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">mpas-developers mailing list<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu">mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpas-developers">http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpas-developers</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote>_______________________________________________<br>mpas-developers mailing list<br><a href="mailto:mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu">mpas-developers@mailman.ucar.edu</a><br>http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpas-developers<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>