Development process

Last edition: Wikinfo(changed_ts)? by Wikinfo(changed_by)?

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

Summary

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.

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
Wiki	wiki:{YEAR}WP/{ACTION_NAME}

Description

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

Implementation

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 and description wrt coding rules.

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 ask the previewer(s) to preview the work within two weeks.

Preview

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).

Then an iterative process should take place between PI and previewer(s) in order to find a consensus

Possible bootlenecks:

• 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.

Tests

Once the development is done, the PI should complete the tests section below and after ask the reviewers to start their review.

This part should contain the detailed results of SETTE tests (restartability and reproducibility for each of the reference configuration) and detailed results of restartability and reproducibility when the option is activated on specified configurations used for this test

Regular checks:

• 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?

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).

Assessments:

• 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?

Finding:

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

---

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