Skip to content
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

DOC: get_subsets do not return masked subset state #2184

Merged

Conversation

pllim
Copy link
Contributor

@pllim pllim commented May 8, 2023

Description

This pull request is a direct follow-up of #2087 .

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)? 🐱

masked subset state
@pllim pllim added documentation Explanation of code and concepts no-changelog-entry-needed changelog bot directive labels May 8, 2023
@pllim pllim added this to the 3.5 milestone May 8, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 8, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (82bebcb) 91.78% compared to head (05d92ec) 91.78%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2184   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   91.78%   91.78%           
=======================================
  Files         147      147           
  Lines       16262    16262           
=======================================
  Hits        14926    14926           
  Misses       1336     1336           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
jdaviz/app.py 92.92% <ø> (ø)

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

Copy link
Member

@kecnry kecnry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there anywhere in RTD that needs a disclaimer as well? Or do we not introduce get_subsets there at all?

jdaviz/app.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Kyle Conroy <[email protected]>
@pllim
Copy link
Contributor Author

pllim commented May 9, 2023

@kecnry , I didn't see any mention of get_subsets in the docs.

@pllim pllim merged commit c4911b3 into spacetelescope:main May 11, 2023
@pllim pllim deleted the you-get-what-you-get-and-you-dont-get-subset branch May 11, 2023 17:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Explanation of code and concepts no-changelog-entry-needed changelog bot directive Ready for final review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants