• Home
  • Features
  • Pricing
  • Docs
  • Announcements
  • Sign In

Ouranosinc / xclim / 26121612934
92%

Build:
DEFAULT BRANCH: main
Ran 19 May 2026 08:00PM UTC
Jobs 6
Files 60
Run time 1min
Badge
Embed ▾
README BADGES
x

If you need to use a raster PNG badge, change the '.svg' to '.png' in the link

Markdown

Textile

RDoc

HTML

Rst

19 May 2026 07:55PM UTC coverage: 91.834%. Remained the same
26121612934

push

github

web-flow
Fix Indicator documentation for Sphinx 9 (#2358)

<!--Please ensure the PR fulfills the following requirements! -->
<!-- If this is your first PR, make sure to add your details to the
AUTHORS.rst! -->
### Pull Request Checklist:
- [ ] This PR addresses an already opened issue (for bug fixes /
features)
    - This PR fixes #xyz
- [ ] Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
- [ ] (If applicable) Documentation has been added / updated (for bug
fixes / features)
- [x] CHANGELOG.rst has been updated (with summary of main changes)
- [x] Link to issue (:issue:`number`) and pull request (:pull:`number`)
has been added

### What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Turns out sphinx 9 became the one installed in the RTD env somewhere
between xclim 0.60 and 0.61. Sphinx 9 has completely rewritten the
`autodoc` module and our custom indicator documenter is not supported in
the new version.

Recall that an indicator is an instance of the `Indicator` class, so not
one of the objects `autodoc` knows how to document. We have a custom
sphinx extension that registers an `IndicatorDocumenter` which inherits
`FunctionDocumenter` and allows documenting indicators as if they were
functions.

The "legacy" method is still usable with a new option, which this PR
activates.

It looks like extending the new `autodoc` in a similar way is simply
impossible for the moment. There's an issue open on sphinx about this.
For the record : sphinx's doc has an example for custom documenters and
no where in it does it mentions that it's using a "legacy" mechanism and
there's no explanation on how to do this with the new version yet.


The changes to `autodoc_indicator.py` are mainly esthetic, remnants from
a few experiments trying to make it work before finding the solution.

7940 of 8646 relevant lines covered (91.83%)

6.27 hits per line

Jobs
ID Job ID Ran Files Coverage
1 run-3.12-ubuntu-latest- - 26121612934.1 19 May 2026 08:02PM UTC 60
88.71
GitHub Action Run
2 run-3.13-macos-latest- - 26121612934.2 19 May 2026 08:02PM UTC 60
91.04
GitHub Action Run
3 run-3.13-ubuntu-latest- - 26121612934.3 19 May 2026 08:01PM UTC 60
88.03
GitHub Action Run
4 run-{{ matrix.python-version }}-conda - 26121612934.4 19 May 2026 08:02PM UTC 60
91.42
GitHub Action Run
5 run-3.10-ubuntu-latest- - 26121612934.5 19 May 2026 08:01PM UTC 60
88.04
GitHub Action Run
6 run-3.14-ubuntu-latest- - 26121612934.6 19 May 2026 08:00PM UTC 60
88.03
GitHub Action Run
Source Files on build 26121612934
  • Tree
  • List 60
  • Changed 2
  • Source Changed 1
  • Coverage Changed 1
Coverage ∆ File Lines Relevant Covered Missed Hits/Line
  • Back to Repo
  • Github Actions Build #26121612934
  • bf8b58d6 on github
  • Prev Build on main (#25939345955)
  • Next Build on main (#26122761292)
STATUS · Troubleshooting · Open an Issue · Sales · Support · CAREERS · ENTERPRISE · START FREE · SCHEDULE DEMO
ANNOUNCEMENTS · TWITTER · TOS & SLA · Supported CI Services · What's a CI service? · Automated Testing

© 2026 Coveralls, Inc