Skip to content

MX Bluesky 651 fix energy changes#918

Merged
rtuck99 merged 4 commits intomainfrom
mx_bluesky_651_fix_energy_changes
Dec 2, 2024
Merged

MX Bluesky 651 fix energy changes#918
rtuck99 merged 4 commits intomainfrom
mx_bluesky_651_fix_energy_changes

Conversation

@rtuck99
Copy link
Contributor

@rtuck99 rtuck99 commented Nov 26, 2024

Dodal changes for DiamondLightSource/mx-bluesky#651

See MX-bluesky PR DiamondLightSource/mx-bluesky#676

Instructions to reviewer on how to test:

  1. Energy changes work on beamline
  2. Unit tests pass

Checks for reviewer

  • Would the PR title make sense to a scientist on a set of release notes
  • If a new device has been added does it follow the standards
  • If changing the API for a pre-existing device, ensure that any beamlines using this device have updated their Bluesky plans accordingly
  • Have the connection tests for the relevant beamline(s) been run via dodal connect ${BEAMLINE}

@rtuck99 rtuck99 force-pushed the mx_bluesky_651_fix_energy_changes branch from 602459f to 7518e67 Compare November 26, 2024 11:20
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 26, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.05%. Comparing base (6507650) to head (24617fb).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #918   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.04%   96.05%           
=======================================
  Files         136      136           
  Lines        5645     5653    +8     
=======================================
+ Hits         5422     5430    +8     
  Misses        223      223           

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

@rtuck99 rtuck99 marked this pull request as ready for review November 27, 2024 08:45
Copy link
Contributor

@DominicOram DominicOram left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! This may change with some of my suggestions on the mx-bluesky side but given the current structure this is good

@rtuck99 rtuck99 requested a review from DominicOram November 28, 2024 10:22
@rtuck99 rtuck99 requested a review from a team as a code owner December 2, 2024 11:07
Copy link
Collaborator

@noemifrisina noemifrisina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, thanks

@rtuck99 rtuck99 force-pushed the mx_bluesky_651_fix_energy_changes branch from a0cab60 to eb47b4d Compare December 2, 2024 15:29
@rtuck99 rtuck99 force-pushed the mx_bluesky_651_fix_energy_changes branch from eb47b4d to 24617fb Compare December 2, 2024 15:37
@rtuck99 rtuck99 merged commit d5722b3 into main Dec 2, 2024
@rtuck99 rtuck99 deleted the mx_bluesky_651_fix_energy_changes branch December 2, 2024 15:40
huw-dls pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2024
* Energy-related hotfixes from beamline testing 2024-11-12

* Add vfm yaw and lat changes on mirror stripe change
Remove vfm lateral lookup table as it was constant anyway
Add waits for various motions that can't be parallelised

* Changes in response to PR comments

* Move dcm offset to the undulator_dcm instead of in the device plan
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants