.gitlab/issue_templates/Bug.md

+#### Context
+
+_Please provide informations on how to reproduce the bug:_
+
+- [x] Branches impacted: current release and/or main 
+- [x] Reference configuration/test case (chosen or used as template) ~AMM ~gyre ~orca ~papa or engines involved ~ABL ~NST ~OFF ~TOP ~SAO ~SAS ~"SI³" ~SWE
+- [x] Computing architecture: compiler, MPI & NetCDF libs (name and version)
+- [x] Dependencies: ~AGRIF ~BFM ~CICE ~OASIS ~XIOS (with known branch and hash/revision/version), ...
+- [ ] _Any other relevant information_
+
+#### Analysis
+
+_Please give your thoughts on the issue._
+
+#### Fix
+
+_Please share your proven solution or your recommendation on how to proceed._
+
+---
+
+_You can_
+- :clipboard: _Copy code blocks_ (\`\`\`fortran ...\`\`\`) _or  diff outputs_ (\`\`\`diff ...\`\`\`)
+- :paperclip: _Include files_
+- :link:      _Add external links._
+
+:warning: _Please remove all unnecessary lines in this description, like the one you are reading in italic, before creating the issue._ :warning:

.gitlab/issue_templates/Feature.md

+#### Context
+
+_Please provide informations on how to set the modelling environment_
+
+- [ ] Reference configuration/test case (to add, chosen or used as template)
+- [x] Modifications of versioned files: Fortran routines (`*.[Ffh]90`), namelists (`namelist\_*cfg`), outputs settings (`*.xml`), ...
+- [ ] Additional dependencies
+- [ ] New datasets
+- [ ] _Any other relevant information_
+
+#### Proposal
+
+_Please share your ideas or your wishes about modelling improvements for the NEMO model._  
+_In particular, express if you are willing to contribute personally to the implementation of this feature in NEMO._
+
+---
+
+_You can_
+- :clipboard: _Copy code blocks_ (\`\`\`fortran ...\`\`\`) _or  diff outputs_ (\`\`\`diff ...\`\`\`)
+- :paperclip: _Include files_
+- :link:      _Add external links._
+
+:warning: _Please remove all unnecessary lines in this description, like the one you are reading in italic, before creating the issue._ :warning:

.gitlab/issue_templates/Task_preview.md

+#### Development description
+
+_Describe the goal and the methodology._  
+_Add reference documents or publications if relevant._
+
+#### Code 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 ~doc (manuals, guide, web pages, ...)._

.gitlab/merge_request_templates/.gitkeep

+

.gitlab/merge_request_templates/Task_review.md

+#### 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 ~doc (manual, guide, web, ...) now updated or completed following the proposed summary in preview section?

src/OCE/IOM/iom_nf90.F90

@@ -556,6 +556,7 @@ CONTAINS
       LOGICAL               :: lchunk               ! logical switch to activate chunking and compression
       !                                             ! when appropriate (currently chunking is applied to 4d fields only)
       INTEGER               :: idlv                 ! local variable
+      CHARACTER(LEN=256)    :: ccname               ! local variable
       !---------------------------------------------------------------------
       !
       clinfo = '          iom_nf90_rp0123d, file: '//TRIM(iom_file(kiomid)%name)//', var: '//TRIM(cdvar)
@@ -571,7 +572,10 @@ CONTAINS
          ! define the dimension variables if it is not already done
          DO jd = 1, 2
             CALL iom_nf90_check(NF90_INQUIRE_DIMENSION(if90id,jd,iom_file(kiomid)%cn_var(jd),iom_file(kiomid)%dimsz(jd,jd)),clinfo)
-            CALL iom_nf90_check(NF90_DEF_VAR( if90id, TRIM(iom_file(kiomid)%cn_var(jd)), NF90_FLOAT , (/ 1, 2 /),   &
+            ccname = TRIM(iom_file(kiomid)%cn_var(jd))
+            IF ( ccname == 'x') ccname = 'nav_lon'
+            IF ( ccname == 'y') ccname = 'nav_lat'
+            CALL iom_nf90_check(NF90_DEF_VAR( if90id, ccname, NF90_FLOAT , (/ 1, 2 /),   &
                &                              iom_file(kiomid)%nvid(jd) ), clinfo)
          END DO
          iom_file(kiomid)%dimsz(2,1) = iom_file(kiomid)%dimsz(2,2)   ! second dim of first  variable