Fix None Row Detection

[duytnguyendtn]

Description

Found in the MosvizNIRISSExample notebook: when the row isn't set properly the visibility filters seem to misbehave. This PR fixes the logic to detect when rows don't have a row assigned, which properly hides them under the data dropdown.

Before/After

Looks like the NIRISS parser only assigns rows for the 2D spectra, resulting in this bug appearing:

jdaviz/jdaviz/configs/mosviz/plugins/parsers.py

Line 760 in 8b136cc

spec2d.meta['mosviz_row'] = len(spec_labels_2d)

Change log entry

• Is a change log needed? If yes, is it added to CHANGES.rst? If you want to avoid merge conflicts,
  list the proposed change log here for review and add to CHANGES.rst before merge. If no, maintainer
  should add a no-changelog-entry-needed label.

Checklist for package maintainer(s)

This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainer(s) who will review this pull request of some common things to look for. This list is not exhaustive.

• Are two approvals required? Branch protection rule does not check for the second approval. If a second approval is not necessary, please apply the trivial label.
• Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals? Also manually run the affected example notebooks, if necessary.
• Do the proposed changes follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Did the CI pass? If not, are the failures related?
• Is a milestone set? Set this to bugfix milestone if this is a bug fix and needs to be released ASAP; otherwise, set this to the next major release milestone.
• After merge, any internal documentations need updating (e.g., JIRA, Innerspace)?

[duytnguyendtn]

@pllim do you think this hits the trivial barrier? Honestly not sure

[kecnry]

good find, thanks!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 87.89% // Head: 87.89% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (cafd4f6) compared to base (894a922).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1798   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.89%   87.89%           
=======================================
  Files          95       95           
  Lines       10186    10186           
=======================================
  Hits         8953     8953           
  Misses       1233     1233           

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.

[kecnry]

#1799 will hopefully fix dev test failure.

[pllim]

Weird, the bot didn't do anything?

@meeseeksdev backport to v3.1.x

[duytnguyendtn]

Thanks for kicking that off Pey-Lian! I was wondering why I never saw any actions from the bot

[pllim]

Maybe the signal never reached the server or maybe multiple merges around the same time caused some race condition. We'll never know... 🤷