8000 Remove some unused modules by AlexKurek · Pull Request #8630 · spacetelescope/jwst · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Remove some unused modules #8630

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.

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 17, 2024
Merged

Remove some unused modules #8630

merged 4 commits into from
Jul 17, 2024

Conversation

AlexKurek
Copy link
Contributor

Resolves JP-nnnn

Closes #

This PR addresses ...

Checklist for PR authors (skip items if you don't have permissions or they are not applicable)

  • 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
  • All comments are resolved
  • Make sure the JIRA ticket is resolved properly

Copy link
codecov bot commented Jul 8, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 59.60%. Comparing base (536d5c6) to head (aae54e2).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #8630      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   59.60%   59.60%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         391      391              
  Lines       39286    39280       -6     
==========================================
- Hits        23418    23412       -6     
  Misses      15868    15868              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@emolter
Copy link
Collaborator
emolter commented Jul 16, 2024

started regression test run here

Copy link
Collaborator
@emolter emolter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These changes look good to me, pending regtests; indeed, none of these modules are used. It seems to beg the question of why our ruff check didn't catch these earlier. @zacharyburnett maybe that's a question for you?

@zacharyburnett
Copy link
Collaborator
zacharyburnett commented Jul 16, 2024

These changes look good to me, pending regtests; indeed, none of these modules are used. It seems to beg the question of why our ruff check didn't catch these earlier. @zacharyburnett maybe that's a question for you?

it looks like fits_generator and associations are excluded from linting:

jwst/pyproject.toml

Lines 276 to 285 in 8af184c

[tool.ruff]
exclude = [
"jwst/extern",
"docs",
"jwst/associations",
"jwst/fits_generator",
".tox",
".eggs",
"build",
]

I copied this config from the previous flake8 config when moving it to pyproject.toml; I'm not sure why they were excluded in the first place

@zacharyburnett
Copy link
Collaborator

looks like these exclusions were added in 9be1e27

@zacharyburnett
Copy link
Collaborator

I ran rules F401 and F841 on jwst/fits_generator and jwst/associations and it found quite a few: #8651

Copy link
Collaborator
@melanieclarke melanieclarke left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These changes look good to me as well, and it does also sound like a good idea to remove those exclusions from the style checks. Thanks for spotting that, @emolter, and taking care of it @zacharyburnett.

@emolter
Copy link
Collaborator
emolter commented Jul 16, 2024

looks like these exclusions were added in 9be1e27

I think it was even earlier - that commit just split the exclusions across multiple lines.

Thanks for starting this discussion @AlexKurek - it sounds like we should go ahead and merge this one assuming the regression tests don't turn up any surprises, and then look at #8651 separately. Does that sound ok to you @zacharyburnett ?

@zacharyburnett
Copy link
Collaborator

looks like these exclusions were added in 9be1e27

I think it was even earlier - that commit just split the exclusions across multiple lines.

Thanks for starting this discussion @AlexKurek - it sounds like we should go ahead and merge this one assuming the regression tests don't turn up any surprises, and then look at #8651 separately. Does that sound ok to you @zacharyburnett ?

sounds good to me!

@zacharyburnett
Copy link
Collaborator

These changes look good to me as well, and it does also sound like a good idea to remove those exclusions from the style checks. Thanks for spotting that, @emolter, and taking care of it @zacharyburnett.

made a separate PR to remove those exclusions #8652

Copy link
Collaborator
@emolter emolter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Regression tests are clean so I'm happy with this getting merged

@zacharyburnett zacharyburnett merged commit 11cdda3 into spacetelescope:master Jul 17, 2024
27 checks passed
@nden nden added this to the Build 11.1 milestone Jul 20, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants
0