-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 390
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
Refactors: Make kwargs keyword only for remaining packages #2703
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2703 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 65.73% 65.73%
=======================================
Files 233 233
Lines 17842 17842
=======================================
Hits 11729 11729
Misses 6113 6113
📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
I'm marking this ready for review. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me. None of these changes look like they would break any standard use cases.
It's more than OK to skip vamdc (@keflavich - we really need to do something about it), but if you don't mind to add cosmosim, it would be great, so the we can say all is done. Edit: ahh, I see your more detailed comment above in the OP about cosmosim. Sure, it's OK to skip it for now, and I would say that module needs an audit and either adding tests (at this point I'm not sure whether to resurrect either of the tests PRs or writing new ones is easier, but it does need some realistic test suite. Enabling testing on the docs could be an option, too). If testing is not possible, we could even consider deprecating it. |
Thanks @nkphysics! |
This PR is to address the remaining packages requiring refactors to make kwargs keyword only (#1746).
From the list in #1746
- [ ] astroquery/vamdc(deprecated since 0.4.2 ??? If I am understanding correctly)P.S. Thought about forking branch from Cosmosim latest unittests #600 but probably requires more work than I think, might look into it in the future.
astroquery/mast (can try to address DOC: make signatures more explicit in MAST docstrings #2665 later)(Seems to be a broader issue effecting more than Mast)Hoping for some feedback on vamdc and cosmosim as I'm a little confused as to what's going on there or what you'll think is the best way to proceed.