TST: Bump OpenAstronomy workflow version

[pllim]

Description

This pull request is to address lagging version in OpenAstronomy workflow. Is dependabot broken? 🤯

• By checking this box, the PR author has requested that maintainers do NOT use the "Squash and Merge" button. Maintainers should respect this when possible; however, the final decision is at the discretion of the maintainer that merges the PR.

[github-actions]

Thank you for your contribution to Astropy! 🌌 This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainers who will review this pull request of some common things to look for.

• Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals?
• Do the proposed changes follow the Astropy coding guidelines?
• Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the Astropy testing guidelines?
• Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the Astropy documentation guidelines?
• Is rebase and/or squash necessary? If so, please provide the author with appropriate instructions. Also see instructions for rebase and squash.
• Did the CI pass? If no, are the failures related? If you need to run daily and weekly cron jobs as part of the PR, please apply the "Extra CI" label. Codestyle issues can be fixed by the bot.
• Is a change log needed? If yes, did the change log check pass? If no, add the "no-changelog-entry-needed" label. If this is a manual backport, use the "skip-changelog-checks" label unless special changelog handling is necessary.
• Is this a big PR that makes a "What's new?" entry worthwhile and if so, is (1) a "what's new" entry included in this PR and (2) the "whatsnew-needed" label applied?
• At the time of adding the milestone, if the milestone set requires a backport to release branch(es), apply the appropriate "backport-X.Y.x" label(s) before merge.

[pllim]

Huh... @Cadair , why does new version of OpenAstronomy choke on the coverage?

Error: No coverage reports found. Please make sure you're generating reports successfully.

[pllim]

On v2.4.0 , I see Coverage XML written to file coverage.xml (https://github.com/astropy/astropy/actions/runs/23458444726/job/68253787134)

Opened OpenAstronomy/github-actions-workflows#383

[Cadair]

I added a commit here to remove the specification of the xml coverage report from the tox.ini. I don't really know why we would need that there other than uploading to codecov, which we do inside the workflows.

I suspect I've probably broken something else by doing this though lol (edit: yes it's broken the circleci stuff, before I fix it I want to make sure it's something we want to do)

[pllim]

Thanks!

remove the specification of the xml coverage report from the tox.ini

It was probably there before OpenAstronomy template was a thing. While I am okay with removing it here, how will leaving it in affect other packages in the same situation? Do they need to remove it or things break? Also won't hardcoding it upstream make it impossible for packages to specify their own coverage output format or filename and so on?

it's broken the circleci stuff

CircleCI looks green to me. What is broken?

[Cadair]

CircleCI looks green to me. What is broken?

The codecov reporting.

Do they need to remove it or things break?

We don't need to remove it, it's just redundant. It's only the --cov flag appearing more than once that causes errors.

[pllim]

The codecov reporting

I see. Is that easy to fix? What are our options now? Thanks!