Cadc and Heasarc Kwarg refactors

[nkphysics]

• Did refactors to make kwargs keyword only for Heasarc and Cadc.(Use keyword only arguments #1746)
• Heasarc' test_mission_cols was failing where it was looking for the incorrect column name (SEARCH_OFFSET instead of SEARCH_OFFSET)
• Heasarc also had doc failures again with docs which were addressed before MAINT: Fixing HEASARC and IMCCE docs issue #2652, so added an ignore_output to the doctest in question which was posing issues. Seems to be an issue on integrals end

[nkphysics]

There seems to be a discrepancy between the way SEARCH_OFFSET is being returned. On my machine test_mission_cols fails since the column returned is SEARCH_OFFSET_, rather than _SEARCH_OFFSET which is how it is being returned on the ci runner.

[nkphysics]

• Heasarc' test_mission_cols was failing where it was looking for the incorrect column name (SEARCH_OFFSET instead of SEARCH_OFFSET)

Removed this and tests passed here. They're still failing locally for me for some reason. Could be the python version, maybe something might have been cached from some of my other work that uses astroquery as a dep (although unlikely cause I run everything in its own venv).
I'm only putting this comment in here cause idk if someone else encountered this.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2671 (514cd66) into main (e388ceb) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head 514cd66 differs from pull request most recent head 6eb5dc4. Consider uploading reports for the commit 6eb5dc4 to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2671   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   69.17%   69.17%           
=======================================
  Files         304      304           
  Lines       22524    22524           
=======================================
  Hits        15580    15580           
  Misses       6944     6944           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
astroquery/cadc/core.py	81.11% <100.00%> (ø)
astroquery/heasarc/core.py	75.48% <100.00%> (ø)

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[bsipocz]

cc @andamian - to confirm you're OK with this for cadc

[bsipocz]

Looks good.

I'll rebase though to get rid of the merge commit, after we got the cadc approval, too.

[bsipocz]

@nkphysics - The usual way to keep a branch up-to-date compared to the default branch is done with a rebase, rather than a merge/pull, which comes easier if you branch out from "upstream"'s main rather than your fork's main. (In fact, I don't even keep my forks main synced up, in fact even got rid of it).

[andamian]

Looks good to me. The only thing I suggest is to set the milestone to 0.5 as this change in the API is not backwards compatible. Users should be instructed what to do when they encounter TypeError. @nkphysics - thanks for the contribution.

[bsipocz]

The only thing I suggest is to set the milestone to 0.5 as this change in the API is not backwards compatible.

Version numbers here mean nothing really, but I hear your suggestion that the next one should be 0.5 :)
(or maybe, for the next one we get to manage to figure out a new numbering system, I'm more and more inclined towards something date based as we cannot do anything semver due to the inability to offer backward combatibility)

[nkphysics]

@nkphysics - The usual way to keep a branch up-to-date compared to the default branch is done with a rebase, rather than a merge/pull, which comes easier if you branch out from "upstream"'s main rather than your fork's main. (In fact, I don't even keep my forks main synced up, in fact even got rid of it).

Gotcha, thanks for the guidance.

[ceb8]

Thanks @nkphysics!