Rename cicedynB to cicedyn, update test suites

[apcraig]

For detailed information about submitting Pull Requests (PRs) to the CICE-Consortium,
please refer to: https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/About-Us/wiki/Resource-Index#information-for-developers

PR checklist

• Short (1 sentence) summary of your PR:
  Rename cicedynB to cicedyn, update test suites, fix sig1, sig2, sigP grid on history file for C-grid

• Developer(s):
  apcraig

• Suggest PR reviewers from list in the column to the right.

• Please copy the PR test results link or provide a summary of testing completed below.
  All tests bit-for-bit, new decomp tests with eap and vp pass, https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/cice_by_hash_forks#a28d12c14b9e8231f2edee093c009c215cda908d
  Last results, https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/cice_by_hash_forks#c176d3aa6d966569cf0d31964d6d20e5e1444dbf

• How much do the PR code changes differ from the unmodified code?

  • bit for bit
  • different at roundoff level
  • more substantial

• Does this PR create or have dependencies on Icepack or any other models?

  • Yes
  • No

• Does this PR update the Icepack submodule? If so, the Icepack submodule must point to a hash on Icepack's main branch.

  • Yes
  • No

• Does this PR add any new test cases?

  • Yes
  • No

• Is the documentation being updated? ("Documentation" includes information on the wiki or in the .rst files from doc/source/, which are used to create the online technical docs at https://readthedocs.org/projects/cice-consortium-cice/. A test build of the technical docs will be performed as part of the PR testing.)

  • Yes
  • No, does the documentation need to be updated at a later time?
    • Yes
    • No

• Please provide any additional information or relevant details below:

• Rename cicedynB directory to cicedyn (See C-grid Code Cleanup  #660)

  • Add softlink for cicedynB
  • Update path in cice.build
  • Update documentation

• Fix sig1, sig2, sigP grid on history file (See netcdf metadata is not right for some C grid output variables #789)

• Fix Fortran warning messages for long lines

• Fix test suite order in cice.setup

• Update test suites to reduce bfbcomp failures due to time outs

  • Add tests to first_suite to help

• Add dyneap and dynpicard decomp tests, add set_nml.dyneap

• Add TAB check in github actions in all .F90 and .c files github actions will fail if source files have TABs

Closes #789

[phil-blain]

these seems like the same tests added in first_suite, is that what we want?

[eclare108213]

I agree this is confusing. What is the purpose of first_suite? I thought it was intended to be a simplified base_suite for quicker turnaround during development.

[phil-blain]

I'm OK with adding a symlink for now, but maybe we could add a note in the release notes that this is temporary and will be removed in a future version ?

[eclare108213]

I agree this is confusing. What is the purpose of first_suite? I thought it was intended to be a simplified base_suite for quicker turnaround during development.

[eclare108213]

I'm a little confused about what this is doing. It only affects testing with github actions? If there are tabs in the source code, then github actions fails? And this just flags where they are so they can be fixed? (i.e. it doesn't fix them)

[apcraig]

@eclare108213, that is correct regarding the tab checking. I'm tired of finding and fixing tabs. It affects the indentation and I don't think we want them in general. I figure if we can trap them early, it's a win.

Regarding first_suite. first_suite is a list of tests that appear in other suites where results are needed for bfbcomp. The idea is that when running a suite of tests, running first_suite first can speed up the results by producing the baselines first. It also reduces the chance that bfbcomp are going to fail because the baseline is not there. The changes to the test suites are relatively minimal even though it looks like a lot

• reorganized suites to run the baselines first
• added a few tests to first_suite
• added two new tests, "decomp" for eap and vp

One other thing is fixed in this PR. The suites were NOT running in the order the user specified prior to now (to my surprise). This is now fixed and should help testing overall. Also, just an FYI. If the same test appears in multiple suites, that's OK, it will only be created once and run once.

quick_suite is the short test suite. There are several test suites now, maybe we need to document their purpose a little better. I will add some details to the documentation.

[eclare108213]

The additional documentation is very helpful. Thanks!

[apcraig]

All cheyenne intel tests pass. https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/cice_by_hash_forks#a28d12c14b9e8231f2edee093c009c215cda908d

Other compilers also seem to pass fine. Will set this PR as ready.

[apcraig]

Will resolve the conflicts after merging #778. Will probably have some new conflicts there too due to renaming of cicedynB directory.

[apcraig]

I rebased this PR and will run another test suite.

[apcraig]

Testing looks good, https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/cice_by_hash_forks#c176d3aa6d966569cf0d31964d6d20e5e1444dbf. I think we can merge this PR. I'll merge tomorrow unless I hear any concerns.