Evaluation

Current solution

The initial request was to enable users to set-up working environment easily providing possibility of choosing:

As a result of discussions two steps (wpcdenv/imasenv) schema was introduced, to provide a freedom of choice and  not to make module name too complicated (like imasenv/3.24.0/intel/18.0/ual/4.1.5/wpcdenv/4.0)

Lesson learned

After one year, since it's initial design, I decided to evaluate wpcdenv/imasenv scenario. Outcome of evaluation:

Thus, there is a need of simplification  of described mechanism and to provide a proper lifecycle !

Simplification of wpcdenv/imasenv schema

Propositions to simplify mechanism for setting working environment base on initial David C. suggestions (yes, Dave, I should follow your hints):

Justification:

Lifecycle

Defaults

Please note that module system allows to provide defaults on every level of module structure - a "tail" of module name can be skipped to use default versions

Taking imasenv as an example, following calls loads the same module :

  • module load imasenv
  • module load imasenv/3.24.0
  • module load imasenv/3.24.0/intel
  • module load imasenv/3.24.0/intel/17.0
  • module load imasenv/3.24.0/intel/17.0/1.0.2 

under assumptions:

  • 3.24.0  is a default DD version
  • intel  is default compiler
  • 17.0 is default compiler version
  • 1.0.2  is default set of libraries compiled by intel

"WPCD products"

ETS workflow is the most complex product being developed by WPCD, however WPCD activity is not limited to ETS development, so this document will refer to "WPCD products" keeping in mind that in most cases it is synonym of "ERTS workflow"

Tagged version

Release candidate (RC)

Alpha version