Contributing code and documentation#
If you would like to contribute a new diagnostic and recipe or a new feature, please discuss your idea with the development team before getting started, to avoid double work and/or disappointment later. A good way to do this is to open an issue on GitHub. This is also a good way to get help with the implementation.
We value the time you invest in contributing and strive to make the process as easy as possible. If you have suggestions for improving the process of contributing, please do not hesitate to propose them, for example by starting a discussion on our discussions page.
See Install from source for instructions on how to set up a development installation.
New development should preferably be done in the
However, for scientists requiring confidentiality, private repositories are
available, see Moving work from the private to the public repository for more information.
The default git branch is
this branch to create a new feature branch from and make a pull request
offers a good introduction to git branches, but it was written for
BitBucket while we use GitHub, so replace the word BitBucket by GitHub
whenever you read it.
It is recommended that you open a draft pull request early, as this will cause CircleCI to run the unit tests, Codacy to analyse your code, and readthedocs to build the documentation. It’s also easier to get help from other developers if your code is visible in a pull request.
Please review the results of the automatic checks below your pull request.
If one of the tests shows a red cross instead of a green checkmark, please click
Details link behind the failing check and try to solve the issue.
Ask @ESMValGroup/tech-reviewers for help if you do not know how to fix the
Note that this kind of automated checks make it easier to
review code, but they are not flawless.
Preferably Codacy code quality checks pass, however a few remaining hard to
solve Codacy issues are still acceptable.
If you suspect Codacy may be wrong, please ask by commenting on your pull
Checklist for pull requests#
To clearly communicate up front what is expected from a pull request, we have the following checklist. Please try to do everything on the list before requesting a review. If you are unsure about something on the list, please ask the @ESMValGroup/tech-reviewers or @ESMValGroup/science-reviewers for help by commenting on your (draft) pull request or by starting a new discussion.
In the ESMValTool community we use pull request reviews to ensure all code and documentation contributions are of good quality. The icons indicate whether the item will be checked during the 🛠 Technical review or 🧪 Scientific review.
All pull requests#
🛠 Code is written according to the code quality guidelines
🛠 Documentation is available
🛠 Tests run successfully
🛠 The list of authors is up to date
🛠 Changed dependencies are added or removed correctly
🛠 The checks shown below the pull request are successful
If a pull request introduces a change that causes a recipe to no longer run successfully (breaking change), or which results in scientifically significant changes in results (science change), additional requirements defined in the backward compatibility policy apply. These include in particular:
🛠 Instructions for the release notes to assist recipe developers to adapt their recipe in light of the backward-incompatible change available.
🛠 If applicable, instructions for recipe developers working on user recipes to enable them to adapt their code related to backward-incompatible changes available (see ESMValTool_Tutorial: issue #263) available.
🛠 Core development team tagged to notify them of the backward-incompatible change, and give at least 2 weeks for objections to be raised before merging to the main branch. If a strong objection is raised the backward-incompatible change should not be merged until the objection is resolved.
🛠 Information required for the “backward-incompatible changes” section in the PR that introduces the backward-incompatible change available.
New or updated recipe and/or diagnostic#
See Making a new diagnostic or recipe for detailed instructions.
New or updated data reformatting script#
See new dataset for detailed instructions.
Pull request title#
The title of a pull request should clearly describe what the pull request changes. If you need more text to describe what the pull request does, please add it in the description. The titles of pull requests are used to compile the Changelog, therefore it is important that they are easy to understand for people who are not familiar with the code or people in the project. Descriptive pull request titles also makes it easier to find back what was changed when, which is useful in case a bug was introduced.
To increase the readability and maintainability or the ESMValTool source code, we aim to adhere to best practices and coding standards. For code in all languages, it is highly recommended that you split your code up in functions that are short enough to view without scrolling, e.g. no more than 50 lines long.
We include checks for Python, R, NCL, and yaml files, most of which are described in more detail in the sections below. This includes checks for invalid syntax and formatting errors. Pre-commit is a handy tool that can run all of these checks automatically just before you commit your code. It knows knows which tool to run for each filetype, and therefore provides a convenient way to check your code.
The standard document on best practices for Python code is PEP8 and there is PEP257 for code documentation. We make use of numpy style docstrings to document Python functions that are visible on readthedocs.
To check if your code adheres to the standard, go to the directory where
the repository is cloned, e.g.
cd ESMValTool, and run prospector
In addition to prospector, we also use flake8 to automatically check for obvious bugs and formatting mistakes.
When you make a pull request, adherence to the Python development best practices is checked in two ways:
Codacy is a service that runs prospector (and other code quality tools) on changed files and reports the results. Click the ‘Details’ link behind the Codacy check entry and then click ‘View more details on Codacy Production’ to see the results of the static code analysis done by Codacy. If you need to log in, you can do so using your GitHub account.
A pull request should preferably not introduce any new prospector issues. However, we understand that there is a limit to how much time can be spent on polishing code, so up to 10 new (non-trivial) issues is still an acceptable amount. Formatting issues are considered trivial and need to be addressed. Note that the automatic code quality checks by prospector are really helpful to improve the quality of your code, but they are not flawless. If you suspect prospector or Codacy may be wrong, please ask the @ESMValGroup/tech-reviewers by commenting on your pull request.
Note that running prospector locally will give you quicker and sometimes more accurate results than waiting for Codacy.
Most formatting issues in Python code can be fixed automatically by running the commands
yapf -i some_file.py
to add/remove whitespace as required by the standard using yapf,
docformatter -i some_file.py
to run docformatter which helps formatting the docstrings (such as line length, spaces).
Because there is no standard best practices document for NCL, we use
PEP8 for NCL code as
well, with some minor adjustments to accommodate for differences in the
languages. The most important difference is that for NCL code the
indentation should be 2 spaces instead of 4.
Use the command
nclcodestyle /path/to/file.ncl to check if your code
follows the style guide.
More information on the
nclcodestyle command can be found
Best practices for R code are described in The tidyverse style guide. We check adherence to this style guide by using lintr on CircleCI. Please use styler to automatically format your code according to this style guide. In the future we would also like to make use of goodpractice to assess the quality of R code.
Please use yamllint to check that your
YAML files do not contain mistakes.
yamllint checks for valid syntax, common mistakes like key repetition and
cosmetic problems such as line length, trailing spaces, wrong indentation, etc.
When the tool complains about the maximum line length or too many spaces, please
use your own best judgement about whether solving the issue will make your
recipe more readable.
Any text file#
A generic tool to check for common spelling mistakes is codespell.
As written text in the directory doc/sphinx/source. When writing reStructuredText (
.rst) files, please try to limit the line length to 80 characters and always start a sentence on a new line. This makes it easier to review changes to documentation on GitHub.
As docstrings or comments in code. For Python code, the docstrings of Python modules, classes, and functions that are mentioned in doc/sphinx/source/api are used to generate documentation. This results in the ESMValTool Code API Documentation.
What should be documented#
Any code documentation that is visible on docs.esmvaltool.org should be well written and adhere to the standards for documentation for the respective language. Note that there is no need to write extensive documentation for functions that are not visible in the online documentation. However, a short description in the docstring helps other contributors to understand what a function is intended to do and and what its capabilities are. For short functions, a one-line docstring is usually sufficient, but more complex functions might require slightly more extensive documentation.
How to build and view the documentation#
Whenever you make a pull request or push new commits to an existing pull
request, readthedocs will automatically build the documentation.
The link to the documentation will be shown in the list of checks below your
pull request, click ‘Details’ behind the check
docs/readthedocs.org:esmvaltool to preview the documentation.
If all checks were successful, you may need to click ‘Show all checks’ to see
the individual checks.
To build the documentation on your own computer, go to the directory where the repository was cloned and run
sphinx-build doc/sphinx/source/ doc/sphinx/build/
sphinx-build -Ea doc/sphinx/source/ doc/sphinx/build/
to build it from scratch. Make sure that your newly added documentation builds without warnings or errors and looks correctly formatted. CircleCI will build the documentation with the command
sphinx-build -W doc/sphinx/source/ doc/sphinx/build/
to catch mistakes that can be detected automatically.
When reviewing a pull request, always check that the documentation checks shown below the pull request were successful. Successful checks have a green ✓ in front, a ❌ means the test job failed.
Integration with the ESMValCore documentation#
The ESMValCore documentation
is hosted as a
of the ESMValTool documentation on readthedocs.
To link to a section from the ESMValCore documentation from the reStructuredText
.rst) files, use the usual
:ref: but prefix the reference with
:ref:`esmvalcore:recipe` to link to
The recipe format.
There is a script that generates the navigation menu shown on the left when you view the documentation. This script is called doc/sphinx/source/gensidebar.py in the ESMValTool repository and it should be identical to doc/gensidebar.py in the ESMValCore repository, or the sidebar will change when navigating from the ESMValTool documentation to the ESMValCore documentation and vice-versa.
To check various aspects of the recipes and code, there tests available in the tests directory.
Whenever you make a pull request or push new commits to an existing pull request, these tests will be run automatically on CircleCI. The results appear at the bottom of the pull request. Click on ‘Details’ for more information on a specific test job. To see some of the results on CircleCI, you may need to log in. You can do so using your GitHub account.
To run the tests on your own computer, go to the directory where the repository
is cloned and run the command
Have a look at Testing recipes for information on testing recipes.
Every night, more extensive tests are run to make sure that problems with the installation of the tool are discovered by the development team before users encounter them. These nightly tests have been designed to mimic the installation procedures described in the documentation, e.g. in the Installation chapter. The nightly tests are run using both CircleCI and GitHub Actions, the result of the tests ran by CircleCI can be seen on the CircleCI project page and the result of the tests ran by GitHub Actions can be viewed on the Actions tab of the repository.
When reviewing a pull request, always check that all test jobs on CircleCI were successful. Successful test jobs have a green ✓ in front, a ❌ means the test job failed.
Before considering adding a new dependency, carefully check that the license of the dependency you want to add and any of its dependencies are compatible with the Apache 2.0 license that applies to the ESMValTool. Note that GPL version 2 license is considered incompatible with the Apache 2.0 license, while the compatibility of GPL version 3 license with the Apache 2.0 license is questionable. See this statement by the authors of the Apache 2.0 license for more information.
When adding or removing dependencies, please consider applying the changes in the following files:
environment_osx.ymlcontains development dependencies for MacOSX. Should be the same as
environment.yml, but currently without multi language support.
esmvaltool/install/Julia/Project.tomlcontains Julia dependencies that can be installed from the default Julia package registry
setup.pycontains all Python dependencies, regardless of their installation source
Note that packages may have a different name on conda-forge than on PyPI or CRAN.
Several test jobs on CircleCI related to the installation of the tool will only run if you change the dependencies. These will be skipped for most pull requests.
When reviewing a pull request where dependencies are added or removed, always check that the changes have been applied in all relevant files.
Pull request checks#
To check that a pull request is up to standard, several automatic checks are run when you make a pull request. Read more about it in the Tests and Documentation sections. Successful checks have a green ✓ in front, a ❌ means the check failed.
If you need help with the checks, please ask the technical reviewer of your pull request for help. Ask @ESMValGroup/tech-reviewers if you do not have a technical reviewer yet.
If the checks are broken because of something unrelated to the current
pull request, please check if there is an open issue that reports the problem
and create one if there is no issue yet.
You can attract the attention of the @ESMValGroup/esmvaltool-coreteam by
mentioning them in the issue if it looks like no-one is working on solving the
The issue needs to be fixed in a separate pull request first.
After that has been merged into the
main branch and all checks are green
again on the
main branch, merge it into your own branch to get the tests
When reviewing a pull request, always make sure that all checks were successful. If the Codacy check keeps failing, please run prospector locally. If necessary, ask the pull request author to do the same and to address the reported issues. See the section on code_quality for more information. Never merge a pull request with failing CircleCI or readthedocs checks.