Add capability to run diff resolutions for marine anl and background

[guillaumevernieres]

Description

This PR mostly includes configuration changes to allow the use a B-matrix at a defined resolution that may or may not be the same as the background.

Changes of note:

• Addition of an interpolation step in the B-matrix job

• version update for the fix files

• the gdas.cd update is not the correct one yet.

  Resolves Implement the marine analysis at a resolution different from the deterministic #3230
  Resolves Background error at 1/2 deg GDASApp#1375

Dependencies

• Add code changes for the implementation of the low-resolution B GDASApp#1441
• Configuration for the low res marine B jcb-gdas#66

Type of change

• Bug fix (fixes something broken)
• New feature (adds functionality)
• Maintenance (code refactor, clean-up, new CI test, etc.)

Change characteristics

• Is this a breaking change (a change in existing functionality)? NO
• Does this change require a documentation update? NO
• Does this change require an update to any of the following submodules? YES (If YES, please add a link to any PRs that are pending.)
  • EMC verif-global
  • GDAS
  • GFS-utils
  • GSI
  • GSI-monitor
  • GSI-utils
  • UFS-utils
  • UFS-weather-model
  • wxflow

How has this been tested?

Subset of the ci tests on hercules and hera

Checklist

• Any dependent changes have been merged and published
• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have documented my code, including function, input, and output descriptions
• My changes generate no new warnings
• New and existing tests pass with my changes
• This change is covered by an existing CI test or a new one has been added
• Any new scripts have been added to the .github/CODEOWNERS file with owners
• I have made corresponding changes to the system documentation if necessary

[DavidNew-NOAA]

Looks good except for the one comment

[guillaumevernieres]

The subset of tests relevant to this PR passed. I'm marking this as ready to review.

[AndrewEichmann-NOAA]

Refresh my memory - what does setting to 0 do to this?

[WalterKolczynski-NOAA]

Only the gdas cycle will run, not the gfs.

[AndrewEichmann-NOAA]

Is this intentional?

[AndrewEichmann-NOAA]

Is this intentional?

[WalterKolczynski-NOAA]

Converting to draft until this is ready.

[guillaumevernieres]

Converting to draft until this is ready.

It was a draft, I converted it to ready to review. If you convert it back to draft, at the very least explain why.

[WalterKolczynski-NOAA]

It was a draft, I converted it to ready to review. If you convert it back to draft, at the very least explain why.

• There's no description, just a "TODO"
• Says there is an associated gdas PR but doesn't list it, so I have no idea whether it was merged (and the gdas issue that is listed is still open and also has no PR connected to it). There is a gdas.cd update, so maybe that is all done, but I have no way of knowing that.
• There are still personal paths in the PR
• Checklist is un-checked

Those all say to me this PR is not ready. If it is ready, those things need to be addressed.

[guillaumevernieres]

It was a draft, I converted it to ready to review. If you convert it back to draft, at the very least explain why.

• There's no description, just a "TODO"
• Says there is an associated gdas PR but doesn't list it, so I have no idea whether it was merged (and the gdas issue that is listed is still open and also has no PR connected to it). There is a gdas.cd update, so maybe that is all done, but I have no way of knowing that.
• There are still personal paths in the PR
• Checklist is un-checked

Those all say to me this PR is not ready. If it is ready, those things need to be addressed.

Fair enough. I think I made the update to the PR description. @JessicaMeixner-NOAA @CatherineThomas-NOAA and myself added the gfsv17 yaml configurations a few months ago to facilitate running experiments. These have always been pointing to user's path. I can move the offending yamls out this repo if you don't think they should be there.

[WalterKolczynski-NOAA]

Fair enough. I think I made the update to the PR description. @JessicaMeixner-NOAA @CatherineThomas-NOAA and myself added the gfsv17 yaml configurations a few months ago to facilitate running experiments. These have always been pointing to user's path. I can move the offending yamls out this repo if you don't think they should be there.

As discussed in-person before I got a chance to reply, they can stay.