Version 87 (modified by nemo, 19 months ago) (diff)

Development process

Last edition: 10/25/19 11:59:08 by nemo

  1. Summary
  2. Preview
  3. Tests
  4. Review


Action {ACTION_NAME} Subject
PI(S) Names
Digest Brief description with motivations and main tasks
Dependencies If any
Branch source:/NEMO/branches/{YEAR}/dev_r{REV}_{ACTION_NAME}
Previewer(s) Names
Reviewer(s) Names

The following sections should be completed by the PI of the development, before starting to develop the code, in order to find agreement on the method and the implementation beforehand.


Describe the goal of development and the methodology.
Add reference documents or publications if relevant.


Describe flow chart of the changes in the code
List the Fortran modules and subroutines to be created/edited/deleted
Detailed list of new variables to be defined (including namelists), give for each the chosen name wrt coding rules and description.

Documentation updates

Using previous parts, define the main changes to be done in the NEMO literature (manuals, guide, web pages, …).

Once the PI has completed this section, he should send a mail to the previewer(s), asking them to preview the work within two weeks.


Since the preview step must be completed before the PI starts the coding, the previewer(s) answers are expected to be completed within the two weeks after the PI has sent the request to the previewer(s).
An iterative process should take place between PI and previewer(s) in order to find a consensus on

  • the methodology
  • the flowchart and list of routines to be changed
  • the new list of variables wrt coding rules
  • the summary of updates in literature

Once an agreement has been reached, preview is ended and the PI can start the development into his branch.


Detailed results of SETTE tests (restartability and reproducibility for each of the reference configuration) Detailed results of restartability and reproducibility when the option is activated.
Please indicate the configuration used for this test

  • Can this change be shown to produce expected impact (option activated)?
  • Can this change be shown to have a null impact (option not activated)?
  • Results of the required bit comparability tests been run: are there no differences when activating the development?
  • If some differences appear, is reason for the change valid/understood?
  • If some differences appear, is the impact as expected on model configurations?
  • Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics?
  • If no, is reason for the change valid/understood?
  • Are there significant changes in run time/memory?


Once the development is done, the PI should complete the tests section below and ask the reviewers to start their review.
A successful review is needed to schedule the merge of this development into the future NEMO release during next Merge Party (usually in November).

Code changes and documentation

  • Is the proposed methodology now implemented?
  • Are the code changes in agreement with the flowchart defined at preview step?
  • Are the code changes in agreement with list of routines and variables as proposed at preview step?
    If, not, are the discrepancies acceptable?
  • Is the in-line documentation accurate and sufficient?
  • Do the code changes comply with NEMO coding standards?
  • Is the development documented with sufficient details for others to understand the impact of the change?
  • Is the project literature (manual, guide, web, …) now updated or completed following the proposed summary in preview section?


  • Is the review fully successful?
  • If not, please indicate date and what is still missing?

Once review is successful, the development must be scheduled for merge during next Merge Party Meeting.