ALMA integration tests fix #2224
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good.
Could you please add some documentation about the --alma-site testing to https://astroquery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/testing.html ?
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2224 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 61.81% 61.96% +0.15%
==========================================
Files 129 129
Lines 16295 16297 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 10072 10099 +27
+ Misses 6223 6198 -25
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
@keflavich , @bsipocz - I think this is ready. Please have a look. Thanks |
| """ | ||
| Returns an alma client class. `--alma-site` pytest option can be used | ||
| to have the client run against a specific site | ||
| :param request: pytest request fixture |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
doesn't matter here as we don't docstring test functions, but normally we use numpydoc style docstring formatting
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def pytest_addoption(parser): | ||
| parser.addoption( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
again, this is nit pick, we don't use 'black', formatting so no need to put every arg in a new line 😄
setup.cfg
Outdated
| @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ astropy_header = true | |||
| text_file_format = rst | |||
| xfail_strict = true | |||
| remote_data_strict = true | |||
| addopts = --doctest-rst | |||
| #addopts = --doctest-rst | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please remove this comment, we started to doctest narrative docs for a couple of modules and eventually would like to see all of them being tested
|
I've also rebased to be able to add a changelog for the new pytest option. |
|
Thanks @andamian! |
Updates to the ALMA integration tests to use ALMA production servers.
A fix for #2157