Closed wolfiex closed 8 months ago
Marking as stale due to no comments.
The tables serve more than CMOR. They also evolve to serve new MIP phases. I wonder if the generic MIP_tables might be more appropriate, or "MIP_infrastructure_tables", perhaps including an infrastructure version number (independent of MIP phase).
My thoughts on this were that if it's not broken, don't fix it. We are primarily writing the format of the files contained in the Table/ subdirectory for CMOR use (targeted at the 3.8.0 release to consider the changes in https://github.com/PCMDI/cmor/issues/718#issuecomment-1821820710).
"CMORizing" is a verb that most folks throw around these days, which basically means "write data to the CMIP format", but doesn't necessarily mean use the CMOR software to do it. To maintain support for the development of the software having "cmor" somewhere prominent would be useful, and the title of the repo serves that role well.
Is it worth escalating this to a 'discussion' instead of an issue?
If it's not broken... I'd ignore/close and if it becomes a pain point at some future stage, we can reopen and reconsider. Let's just get things working now and finesse these points when they get some attention
It has been suggested by a couple of people that the versatile nature of this repository should be reflected in the naming.
I am therefore opening this topic up for discussion here.