[esp-r] Re: release of ESP-r version 11.2

[Beausoleil-Morrison, Ian]

Dear Axel,

Good to hear from you.  Please find my responses to your questions
below.


> - The build script installs all .svn sub-directories, which I don't
> believe are required for esp-r to function.

Most sections of the Install script have been reworked.  The result is a
more streamlined and improved installation, as you note.  However, the
portions of the Install script that deal with the creation of the
"training", "validation", and "manual" installation directories have not
yet been upgraded.  As you note the ".svn" directories are unnecessarily
installed in these three directories.

To avoid this situation, you can download the source code using an "svn
export" rather than an "svn checkout" command:
	svn export https://esp-r.net/espr/esp-r/trunk
	OR
	svn export http://esp-r.net/espr/esp-r/trunk

With this, the Install script will not copy any ".svn" directories into
the installation directory.

 
> - I've been preparing the next release of LEARNIX
> (http://luminance.londonmet.ac.uk/learnix/index.shtml), and 
> only checked
> out 11.1 less than two days prior the anouncement of 11.2. In 
> those less
> than 48 hour, an entirely different built system was introduced which
> could potentially has far-reaching implications on the 
> functionality and
> accuracy of the software. So if any testing did happen (which 
> I assume),
> then it could have only lasted less then 48 hours. For something as
> fundamental as a new build script, this strikes me as a little short.

Version 11.1 was released in July and version 11.2 was released last
week.  We expect future releases will be spaced at about this interval,
i.e. every three or four months.

Extensive regression testing and cross-platform testing is conducted
prior to each release.  This quality assurance procedure is designed to
assure that no differences in ESP-r functionality or simulation results
are introduced between releases. If modifications to ESP-r have caused
differences in simulation results, the release testing assures that the
differences are attributable to the changes introduced by the developer,
and not the result of an unintended bug.

Refer to section 10 of src/Readme for a summary of the regression and
cross-platform testing that was conducted prior to the 11.2 release.


> - In comparision to 11.1 two days ago, the prompt regarding 
> the new XML2
> output has disappeard. Is this default-enabled now?

Users have the option of compiling the source code with XML output
support, but this feature is disabled by default.  The Install script
now contains error checking to prevent compilation of this feature on
unsupported platforms/compiler types or when the required XML header
files cannot be found on the system.  The Install script automatically
disables the XML output option (with a warning) if these tests fail.


> - When you mention numerial differences with the new GNU F77 compiler,
> than this can only mean that building under gcc-g77 version 4 
> has not been
> tested and is strongly discouraged? This is a very 
> fundamental issue and
> should be highlighted during the build procedure.

The cross-platform testing testing mentioned above has been performed
with the gcc4/gfortran compiler set and we observed as-yet-unexplained
and non-trivial numerical differences compared with gcc3/g77.  Until the
cause of these differences are diagnosed we recommend the use of
gcc3/g77.  Our general impression is that the gfortran side of
gcc4/gfortran is not yet quite a fully functional fortran compiler.


> - With all this said, I wonder if you would actually consider 11.2 a
> 'stable' release,

It is absolutely considered stable.  We don't and won't issue releases
until they are proven stable through the regression and cross-platform
testing mentioned above.


> - This brings me to my last point: SVN. Normal users who have 
> no interest
> in the development process and just wish to download and use 
> any software
> should NEVER EVER have to get anywhere near a concurrent versioning
> system. May I propose that if you do consider 11.2 fit for a 
> production
> environment, then please do provide tar balls like you used to do.

When the decision was taken to create the ESP-r Central repository for
ESP-r's source code development, we took the decision to distribute
source code exclusively through this repository.  This ensures that all
developers are working with exactly the same code base.  Distribution of
source code by a secondary route such as tarballs risks introducing
unintended forks in the code base.  If we hear a resounding chorus from
users who find this problematic then that decision could be revisited.
Note that ESRU continues to distribute pre-compiled versions of ESP-r
for a number of operating environments for those users that do not with
to compile themselves.

Best regards,
- Ian