Fix for ccpp_track_variables.py: Need "recursive=True" for glob on .meta files

[mkavulich]

Because of the change in directory structure for CCPP physics (ufs-community/ccpp-physics#99), there are now .meta files at different levels in the directory tree. The ccpp_track_variables.py script needs the location of these .meta files as an input argument to the script, but the call to glob.glob in the script does not use the recursive=True argument, so even if the user passes in the argument -m './physics/physics/**/' (which should include all subdirectories), the call to glob.glob only searches one level. Our simple test case only has .meta files at a single directory level, so we never caught this issue.

Simply adding the recursive=True argument fixes this issue.

User interface changes?: No

Fixes: #580 ccpp_track_variables.py is broken since CCPP physics directory structure was reorganized

Testing:
test removed: none
unit tests: Passing
system tests: none
manual testing: See Issue #580

[gold2718]

def review_pr581(approved=False):
    if not approved:
        approved = review_pr581(approved=not approved)

    return approved

[dustinswales]

@mkavulich This change looks good to me.
Should this PR be targeting the main branch?

[peverwhee]

@dustinswales @mkavulich I vote for targeting develop as is, but, if this needs to get into main soon, we should make this the "event" that triggers a PR from develop to main

[mkavulich]

I'm a bit conflicted on the merge destination here: While I would love to merge directly to main here to skip the requirements of needing to run all tests for all dycores -- and in this case it should not affect anything since it only changes a stand-alone script and not anything else in the framework -- I think it would set a bad precedent to change the repo's workflow for this PR.

My preferred solution is that SCM can point directly to this hash on the develop branch once it is merged; ideally host model releases should point to the main branch, but since main is so young I think it would be fine in this case. @grantfirl @dustinswales I'm curious if you have different thoughts.