Should ACCESS-NRI fork

My particular problem with segfaults is solved, but we still need to have an up-to-date set of branches in an access-esm repository that reflects progress in building ACCESS ESM1.5 from sources on GitHub. Should this be at GitHub - coecms/access-esm: Main Repository for ACCESS-ESM configurations or should we create a fork of this repository at and add branches there?

Hi Paul

There should always be only one definite repository of the ACCESS-ESM configurations. Eventually that version should rest with the ACCESS-NRI, hopefully within a month or two.

But I think there should be an official handover when you feel confident that you can maintain the definite version.

Also, I think this should be done with a real repository transfer (see Transferring a repository - GitHub Docs) instead of only a fork, so that disruptions are kept to a minimum.

We talked to @heidi about this and we understand that she would be our main contact for the transition.

I talked to @paulleopardi and said I could see the benefit in a fork, as it makes it easier for he and @MartinDix (and other ACCESS-NRI folk) to collaborate on their work. They can push branches to a shared repo.

Another option would be for CMS to add @MartinDix and @paulleopardi as collaborators to your repo. We should meet and discuss, but folks have been very busy with AMOS this week.