The CCZ4 variant of McLachlan should be documented. The McLachlan documentation currently consists of the file Cactus/arrangements/McLachlan/doc/mclachlan.tex.
Can we can close this ticket as it is superseded by #880?
The telecon minutes said that CCZ4 would be documented, which is why I opened this ticket with the current release milestone. However, my recollection of the call was that we said we didn't need additional documentation because this was more of an enhancement to an existing component rather than a new component. Did we decide that docs were needed? I did not set the #880 milestone for this release, as this will likely not be done in time anyway.
My understanding was that CCZ4 is currently on the same level as BSSN with regards to documentation in McLachlan. They use the same Kranc script and so should have common documentation. Very little (if any?) of the current McLachlan documentation is specific to the BSSN code, so in that sense CCZ4 is just as well documented as BSSN.
I agree that its very important that we have good documentation included with McLachlan and that this should include a full description of CCZ4, but I think this should be done for the arrangement as a whole as part of #880. Does this need to be done before the release?
I believe not. As I said, I only created the ticket because of the minutes. If someone else who was on the telecon agrees, we can close this ticket and not require specific CCZ4 documentation for the upcoming release.
The suggestion in the phone call was to have handwritten documentation for CCZ4 (and McLachlan itself) in the arrangement documentation to describe the Mathematica code (eg important variants). This was decided to be a different issue from including the thorn. There is a pointer to the paper used for CCZ4 in the Mathematica source and the current status of CCZ4 is thus as good as that of McLachlan. The minutes were in error. I am removing the milestone because of this.