Add ESMValTool Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity recipe

[bouweandela]

Description

Add Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) to the ESMValTool metrics package.

Related to #32.

This works, but will result in many failures because of missing data and may be inaccurate because of missing cell areas. Ideas for further improvement:

• Select only datasets that have both experiments and all four variables
• Select only datasets that have a contiguous, shared, nonzero timerange
• Add cell areas to the groups

Checklist

Please confirm that this pull request has done the following:

• Tests added
• Documentation added (where applicable)
• Changelog item added to changelog/

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...altool/src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/__init__.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...altool/src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/_version.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...rc/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/metrics/__init__.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ol/src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/metrics/base.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ool/src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/metrics/ecs.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/metrics/example.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...mvaltool/src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/recipe.py	94.52% <100.00%> (-0.08%)	⬇️
...smvaltool/src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool/types.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

[lewisjared]

@bouweandela I had a go at resolving the conflicts due to renaming packages here: bouweandela#1

Is this ready for review? I had a quick look through and it's looking great, with a few extra TODO's to add to the list :D

[bouweandela]

Is this ready for review?

It is ready if you are OK with postponing the TODOs to a next pull request.

[lewisjared]

It is ready if you are OK with postponing the TODOs to a next pull request.

Have you seen how many TODOs we have 😆

[lewisjared]

Nice stuff

[lewisjared]

We should make a common type and validation for this in due course

[lewisjared]

I haven't typically made the test directory a python module. What are the pros of this?

[bouweandela]

I removed the files for now and we can talk about it later. In my experience, it is safer to put __init__.py files everywhere to avoid running into unexpected errors because some development tooling (e.g. documentation builder, test runner, etc) interprets the files as namespace packages.

It is also a common practice to ship the tests with the software. This has the advantage that you can even run the tests when installing the package from PyPI. This is e.g. useful when checking that the package is correctly building on conda-forge. To do this, I would move the tests folder into the src/cmip_ref_metrics_esmvaltool folder and add __init__.py files.