Repository navigation
Conversation
mhvk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pllim - looks mostly good, but in test_metadata, the OrderedDict stuff should be kept - it is specifically to test that the class (and a subclass) work, and that should remain the case. This should also solve the failure (I think...)
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class OrderedDictSubclass(OrderedDict): | ||
| class OrderedDictSubclass(dict): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This one we should keep the same - it specifically tests what happens if someone subclasses OrderedDict (which should still be allowed)
| assert len(d.meta) == 0 | ||
|
|
||
| @pytest.mark.parametrize(('meta'), ([dict([('a', 1)]), | ||
| OrderedDict([('a', 1)]), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should also still be tested.
| self.test_class(*self.args, meta=meta) | ||
|
|
||
| @pytest.mark.parametrize(('meta'), ([dict([('a', 1)]), | ||
| OrderedDict([('a', 1)]), |
5d4b525 to
3b2784c
Compare
|
I don't have enough Table metadata parsing with YAML expertise to fix this error: Log: https://travis-ci.com/github/astropy/astropy/jobs/414455460#L1603 |
|
I think that change is expected - the |
7472b0c to
9e8491a
Compare
|
|
||
| try: | ||
| scs = self.header.table_meta['__serialized_columns__'] | ||
| if isinstance(self.header.table_meta, (list, tuple)): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I dunno... I have to make some weird patching to get the tests to pass...
| instance._meta = dict() | ||
| return | ||
|
|
||
| if isinstance(value, (list, tuple)): |
|
Update: Got the tests to pass, though I see many more occurrences of coordinates io.ascii io.fits io.misc io.registry modeling nddata table tests.runner time utils These are ignored on purpose: visualization.wcsaxes wcs.wcsapi |
|
I think spreading it over multiple PRs seems wise. That way test failures are easier to check/understand, and we also ensure everything gets properly looked at. Plus, we can share the load! |
|
@mhvk , in that case, do you think the current state of the PR is atomic enough? Or should I include some other stuff so that the changes in |
|
@pllim - I think this PR is quite nicely atomic, just focussing on |
9e8491a to
075307a
Compare
|
Thanks, @mhvk ! I'm limiting the scope of this PR to |
|
RTD timeout is unrelated. |
|
@taldcroft - could you review this PR? I am not familiar enough with the test cases to be confident that we wouldn't accidentally break loading of old yaml files, etc. |
|
@pllim - we do still need to bump the min version of PyYAML. Where to do that? |
|
@taldcroft , I identified the following files that needs updating from a global |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
b01aaa2 to
3020082
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Attempt to fix some failures.
627704b to
fdba8ec
Compare
|
@taldcroft and @mhvk -- I removed conflicts, bumped PyYAML minversion, and addressed the remaining comments. Please review carefully one more time. And if it looks good, let's get this in before I get more conflicts. Thanks! (I don't think test failures are related...) |
|
@pllim - sorry, but there is a real problem with the current implementation, see #10932 (comment) and #10932 (comment). It's been on my list of things to do but I haven't quite been looking forward to it. 😄 |
|
Re: #10932 (comment) -- Ah, sorry; I thought by bumping PyYAML minversion, that would be enough but I had not been following the convo very closely. I'll turn this PR back to draft then. Thanks for the update! |
|
I think this is still stuck without clear path forward, so moving milestone. |
|
Hi humans 👋 - this pull request hasn't had any new commits for approximately 7 months. I plan to close this in 30 days if the pull request doesn't have any new commits by then. In lieu of a stalled pull request, please consider closing this and open an issue instead if a reminder is needed to revisit in the future. Maintainers may also choose to add keep-open label to keep this PR open but it is discouraged unless absolutely necessary. If this PR still needs to be reviewed, as an author, you can rebase it to reset the clock. If you believe I commented on this pull request incorrectly, please report this here. |
|
Hi humans 👋 - this pull request hasn't had any new commits for approximately 7 months. I plan to close this in 30 days if the pull request doesn't have any new commits by then. In lieu of a stalled pull request, please consider closing this and open an issue instead if a reminder is needed to revisit in the future. Maintainers may also choose to add keep-open label to keep this PR open but it is discouraged unless absolutely necessary. If this PR still needs to be reviewed, as an author, you can rebase it to reset the clock. If you believe I commented on this pull request incorrectly, please report this here. |
|
Ops, sorry for the double bot post. Hopefully I fixed the bug upstream. |
|
Oh, wait this is my own PR. Hmm too many conflicts now. I am just going to abandon it. |
Blocked by: #10932 (comment)
Description
This pull request is to address part of #10888 . I left
timer.pyalone because it is deprecated and removed in #10281 .TODO
Get the rest ofToo much work. Just smaller focus here.OrderedDict.Resolved
I see failures like this and not sure what to make of it. Maybe @taldcroft or @mhvk can advise.
astropy/astropy/utils/tests/test_metadata.py
Line 32 in ad37af0