Correct spelling of "janic" to "janjic"

[climbfuji]

Three standard names are wrong in the dictionary, "janic" needs to be "janjic" (thanks @DusanJovic-NOAA for spotting this).

The corresponding ccpp-physics, fv3atm and ccpp-scm PRs are:

NCAR/ccpp-physics#766
NOAA-EMC/fv3atm#416
NCAR/ccpp-scm#279

For regression testing with the UFS, see ufs-community/ufs-weather-model#892.

[ligiabernardet]

Thank you for submitting this PR.
Before merging, I suggest creating a tag so that we have a record of the last version of the Standard Names dictionary that the CCPP Physics and UFS atmospheric model were in sync with.

[climbfuji]

Thank you for submitting this PR.
Before merging, I suggest creating a tag so that we have a record of the last version of the Standard Names dictionary that the CCPP Physics and UFS atmospheric model were in sync with.

I can do that, of course, but I am not sure if there is a dedicated "tagger" who creates those tags usually. How would it be named? We won't tag ccpp-physics, or? Just the dictionary?

[ligiabernardet]

Good question. I think it would be good to devise a system in which we tag the Standard Name dictionary, and then tag other repos (e.g., ccpp-physics and host models such as fv3atm and ccpp-scm) to indicate that they are aligned with this tag.

[gold2718]

These changes are okay but I still do not like the proliferation of host-model-specific standard names in this dictionary.

[gold2718]

I think that tagging this repo in coordination with tagging a physics repo would be good practice to document the standard names that were used. Something like:

1. Create new tag for CCPPStandardNames
2. Update phyics repo documentation with new tag name
3. tag physics repo

Does that sound right? I think this captures what you are proposing, we just need to formalize it somewhere.

[climbfuji]

@gold2718 At the last CCPP framework meeting we discussed that we could merge this PR now, create a new tag and then add that version information to the ccpp-physics main branch. We all agreed that versioning the physics repo every time a new tag is created for CCPP standard names is probably not the best way to go; instead, we were thinking of adding a blob to the top-level README.md that says that this version of ccpp-physics utilizes version x.y.z of the CCPPStandardNames repository. ccpp-physics changes very often, much more often than the standard names repo, and there wouldn't be a way to tell for a certain hash of ccpp-physics which version of the ccpp standard names repo it corresponds to. Does this make sense?

[gold2718]

Does this make sense?

Yes, I thought that is what we agreed to. It allows the two repos to be updated asynchronously.

[climbfuji]

Does this make sense?

Yes, I thought that is what we agreed to. It allows the two repos to be updated asynchronously.

Ok, thanks. I will merge this PR.