10000 (JP-2991) Require asdf-transform-schemas greater than 0.3.0 by dmggh · Pull Request #7352 · spacetelescope/jwst · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

(JP-2991) Require asdf-transform-schemas greater than 0.3.0 #7352

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 16, 2022
Merged

(JP-2991) Require asdf-transform-schemas greater than 0.3.0 #7352

merged 5 commits into from
Nov 16, 2022

Conversation

dmggh
Copy link
Contributor
@dmggh dmggh commented Nov 15, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Resolves JP-2991

Closes #

This PR requires the asdf transform version to be at least 0.3.0, by updating setup.cfg. This was prompted by a user unable to open files from MAST using the JWST data models .

Checklist for maintainers

  • added entry in CHANGES.rst within the relevant release section
  • updated or added relevant tests
  • updated relevant documentation
  • added relevant milestone
  • added relevant label(s)
  • ran regression tests, post a link to the Jenkins job below.
    How to run regression tests on a PR
  • Make sure the JIRA ticket is resolved properly

@dmggh dmggh added this to the Build 9.1 milestone Nov 15, 2022
@dmggh dmggh requested review from tapastro and hbushouse November 15, 2022 23:15
@dmggh dmggh self-assigned this Nov 15, 2022
@dmggh dmggh marked this pull request as ready for review November 15, 2022 23:16
@dmggh
Copy link
Contributor Author
dmggh commented Nov 16, 2022

I suspect "asdf-transform" in the dependency is not quite correct - suggestions ?

@nden
Copy link
Collaborator
nden commented Nov 16, 2022

It's asdf_transform_schemas.

@codecov
Copy link
codecov bot commented Nov 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Base: 79.68% // Head: 79.68% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (e7d13e7) compared to base (1f4255f).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #7352   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   79.68%   79.68%           
=======================================
  Files         412      412           
  Lines       37573    37573           
=======================================
  Hits        29941    29941           
  Misses       7632     7632
Flag Coverage Δ *Carryforward flag
nightly 79.66% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 1f4255f
unit 52.23% <ø> (ø)

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@hbushouse
Copy link
Collaborator
hbushouse commented Nov 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

It's asdf_transform_schemas.

Are you sure it's with underscores? The release code on pypi uses dashes: https://pypi.org/project/asdf-transform-schemas/

And this is what I get from "pip freeze", which also uses dashes:
asdf-transform-schemas==0.3.0

@dmggh
Copy link
Contributor Author
dmggh commented Nov 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Good point. I was going by Nadia's comment from last night.

@tapastro
Copy link
Contributor

However, in python, importing requires the underscores and rejects the dashes... 🤔 I'd guess that we want the underscores here, as it's dealing with the package in a python environment.

hbushouse
hbushouse reviewed Nov 16, 2022
View reviewed changes
@hbushouse
Copy link
Collaborator

However, in python, importing requires the underscores and rejects the dashes... 🤔 I'd guess that we want the underscores here, as it's dealing with the package in a python environment.

Huh, really? We've got other entries in setup.cfg that use dashes, such as:
spherical-geometry>=1.2.22
asdf-astropy>=0.2.2

@nden
Copy link
Collaborator
nden commented Nov 16, 2022

I think both spellings are valid in the setup file. However, when importing a package underscores are necessary. To keep it consistent we can spell it with dashes here.

@dmggh
Copy link
Contributor Author
dmggh commented Nov 16, 2022

So I will go with "asdf-transform-schemas" - are we in agreement ?

hbushouse
hbushouse approved these changes Nov 16, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator
@hbushouse hbushouse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. Just needs a rebase to fix conflicts (I'm assuming with the change log).

@dmggh
Copy link
Contributor Author
dmggh commented Nov 16, 2022

These code coverage errors appear to be unrelated.

@dmggh dmggh merged commit 0a9a720 into spacetelescope:master Nov 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@hbushouse hbushouse hbushouse approved these changes

@tapastro tapastro Awaiting requested review from tapastro

Assignees

@dmggh dmggh

Labels
ASDF installation schemas
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Build 9.1
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@dmggh @nden @hbushouse @tapastro
0