Skip to content

Conversation

@NParsonsMO
Copy link
Collaborator

@NParsonsMO NParsonsMO commented Dec 16, 2025

Closes #298 .

PR creation checklist for the developer

  • Has <issue_number> above ☝️ been replaced with the issue number?
  • Has main been selected as the base branch?
  • Does the feature branch name follow the format <issue_number>_<short_description_of_feature>?
  • Does the text of the PR title exactly match with the text (not including the issue number) of the issue title?
  • Have appropriate reviewers been added to the PR (once it is ready for review)?
  • Has the PR been assigned to the developer(s)?
  • Have the same labels as on the issue (except for the good first issue label) been added to the PR?
  • Has the Climate Model Evaluation Workflow (CMEW) project been added to the PR?
  • Has the appropriate milestone been added to the PR?

Definition of Done for the developer

  • Does the change in this PR address the above issue / have all acceptance criteria been met?
  • Does the change in this PR follow the requirements in the wiki: Developer Guide (including copyrights)?
  • Have new tests related to the change been added?
  • Do all the GitHub workflow checks pass?
  • Do all the tests run locally and pass? (Note: the tests are not run by the GitHub workflow, see wiki: Run the tests locally)
  • Has the API documentation (e.g. docstrings in Python modules) related to the change been updated appropriately?
  • Has the user documentation (i.e. everything in the doc directory) related to the change been updated appropriately, including the Quick Start section?
  • Do the HTML pages render correctly? (See wiki: Build the documentation locally)

PR creation checklist for the reviewer

  • Has <issue_number> above ☝️ been replaced with the issue number?
  • Has main been selected as the base branch?
  • Does the feature branch name follow the format <issue_number>_<short_description_of_feature>?
  • Does the text of the PR title exactly match with the text (not including the issue number) of the issue title?
  • Have appropriate reviewers been added to the PR (once it is ready for review)?
  • Has the PR been assigned to the developer(s)?
  • Have the same labels as on the issue (except for the good first issue label) been added to the PR?
  • Has the Climate Model Evaluation Workflow (CMEW) project been added to the PR?
  • Has the appropriate milestone been added to the PR?

Definition of Done for the reviewer

  • Does the change in this PR address the above issue / have all acceptance criteria been met? N/A
  • Does the change in this PR follow the requirements in the wiki: Developer Guide (including copyrights)?
  • Have new tests related to the change been added?
  • Do all the GitHub workflow checks pass?
  • Do all the tests run locally and pass? (Note: the tests are not run by the GitHub workflow, see wiki: Run the tests locally)
  • Has the API documentation (e.g. docstrings in Python modules) related to the change been updated appropriately?
  • Has the user documentation (i.e. everything in the doc directory) related to the change been updated appropriately, including the Quick Start section?
  • Do the HTML pages render correctly? (See wiki: Build the documentation locally)

@NParsonsMO NParsonsMO self-assigned this Dec 16, 2025
@NParsonsMO NParsonsMO added enhancement New feature or request recipe Anything related to ESMValTool labels Dec 16, 2025
@NParsonsMO NParsonsMO linked an issue Dec 16, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
@NParsonsMO NParsonsMO added the rose Anything related to Rose label Dec 16, 2025
@NParsonsMO NParsonsMO changed the title Feed model label through as alias Feed "label for plots" through as an "alias" in ESMValTool recipe Dec 16, 2025
@NParsonsMO NParsonsMO marked this pull request as ready for review December 17, 2025 09:45
Copy link
Collaborator

@mo-nikosbaltas mo-nikosbaltas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good. I run the tests and the metoffice workflow and all run correctly. I have not seen Acceptance Criteria in the #298 issue. I have seen comments on possible implementation, but as I understand at the moment this issue provides just the entries to 'alias' for both EVAL and REF. Is this sufficient?

@NParsonsMO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This looks good. I run the tests and the metoffice workflow and all run correctly. I have not seen Acceptance Criteria in the #298 issue. I have seen comments on possible implementation, but as I understand at the moment this issue provides just the entries to 'alias' for both EVAL and REF. Is this sufficient?

I believe it is, as it needs to be combined with a separate PR on the ESMValTool repo to actually see any difference, but good to check with @alistairsellar or @ehogan. I'll ask for a second reviewer tomorrow.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mo-nikosbaltas mo-nikosbaltas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I will wait for comments by @alistairsellar and @ehogan and then I can approve.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request recipe Anything related to ESMValTool rose Anything related to Rose

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Feed "label for plots" through as an "alias" in ESMValTool recipe

3 participants