Re: [AMBER-Developers] Code/documentation deadlines for AmberTools13

From: Jason Swails <>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 21:31:21 -0500

As a followup to anybody that wants to try this themselves -- when I got
rid of the parms.F90 common blocks awhile ago, I had to do the same thing
to PBSA. This obviously breaks compatibility between AmberTools 13 and
Amber 12.

The attached patch (patch -p0 -N < pbsa.diff [from AMBERHOME]) will reverse
that change, and needs to be applied before sander 12 will build with the
AmberTools in the current git tree.

All the best,

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 9:01 PM, David A Case <>wrote:

> Hi everyone:
> Many of you have figured out that Jason and I did not follow through on our
> threat to start an AT13 branch this week. We will now wait until after the
> Amber developers' meeting in Salt Lake, and try to set up a firm testing
> and
> release schedule at that time.
> But note:
> 1. Please get your contributions uploaded to the master branch as soon as
> you
> can. Pay special attention to the documentation!
> 2. The reason for having a "release" of AT13 (rather than a bunch of
> individual program updates) is to force us to do a lot of testing between
> now
> and early April. So plan now to be able to respond to several requests to
> try out release candidates over the next few weeks.
> 3. If you have code that involves both Amber and AmberTools (mainly sqm,
> pbsa, rism, mmpbsa*, but there may be others), try to tests to see if the
> current AmberTools codes still work with original (patched) Amber12
> programs.
> Jason will be sending out instrutions and comments on this, but it is best
> if the people who know the codes the best look carefully at everything, and
> you can start that part now.
> ...thx...dac
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list

Jason M. Swails
Quantum Theory Project,
University of Florida
Ph.D. Candidate

AMBER-Developers mailing list

Received on Fri Mar 08 2013 - 19:00:02 PST
Custom Search