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

Add IRFStacker class #762

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Nov 11, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@JouvinLea
Contributor

JouvinLea commented Nov 10, 2016

@joleroi
As we discussed I implemented the IRFstack class.
I already changed the method in the ObservationStacker class for the spectrum and add a test on the stacked arf and stacked rmf. I checked by hand that this is what you expected. I think this test in spectrum/test/test_observation is already a test for this class.
Cheers,
Lea

Lea Jouvin
@joleroi

Thanks a lot for adding this. I left some minor comments mostly dealing with documentation. I think you accidentally added a copy of irf_stack.py in gammapy/irfs/test. This should not be there, right?

Show outdated Hide outdated gammapy/irf/irf_stack.py
Show outdated Hide outdated gammapy/irf/irf_stack.py
Show outdated Hide outdated gammapy/irf/irf_stack.py
Show outdated Hide outdated gammapy/irf/irf_stack.py
Show outdated Hide outdated gammapy/irf/irf_stack.py
@joleroi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@joleroi

joleroi Nov 10, 2016

Contributor

I think this test in spectrum/test/test_observation is already a test for this class.

I agree

Contributor

joleroi commented Nov 10, 2016

I think this test in spectrum/test/test_observation is already a test for this class.

I agree

@cdeil cdeil added feature and removed infrastructure labels Nov 10, 2016

@cdeil cdeil added this to the 0.5 milestone Nov 10, 2016

@cdeil

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@cdeil

cdeil Nov 10, 2016

Member

@joleroi - thanks for doing the review, I'm unsubscribing from this PR now.

FYI: I've added the "feature" label and removed the "infrastructure" label, and set the milestone to 0.5.
I use "infrastructure" for things like continuous integration or docs build issue.
And by default please always set the milestone to the next release.
If the pull request takes longer, we can always move it to the next release milestone.
I use milestones to fill the changelog before a release, so all issues or pull requests should get a milestone.

Member

cdeil commented Nov 10, 2016

@joleroi - thanks for doing the review, I'm unsubscribing from this PR now.

FYI: I've added the "feature" label and removed the "infrastructure" label, and set the milestone to 0.5.
I use "infrastructure" for things like continuous integration or docs build issue.
And by default please always set the milestone to the next release.
If the pull request takes longer, we can always move it to the next release milestone.
I use milestones to fill the changelog before a release, so all issues or pull requests should get a milestone.

Lea Jouvin
@JouvinLea

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JouvinLea

JouvinLea Nov 10, 2016

Contributor

@joleroi
I took into account you comments! For the docstring I don't know how to put the formula in the center

Contributor

JouvinLea commented Nov 10, 2016

@joleroi
I took into account you comments! For the docstring I don't know how to put the formula in the center

@joleroi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@joleroi

joleroi Nov 10, 2016

Contributor

Thanks, the remaining failure are due to sphinx issues. I can take care of that.

Contributor

joleroi commented Nov 10, 2016

Thanks, the remaining failure are due to sphinx issues. I can take care of that.

@JouvinLea

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JouvinLea

JouvinLea Nov 10, 2016

Contributor

great!
Le 10 nov. 2016 à 15:33, Johannes King notifications@github.com a écrit :

Thanks, the remaining failure are due to sphinx issues. I can take care of that.


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

Contributor

JouvinLea commented Nov 10, 2016

great!
Le 10 nov. 2016 à 15:33, Johannes King notifications@github.com a écrit :

Thanks, the remaining failure are due to sphinx issues. I can take care of that.


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

@joleroi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@joleroi

joleroi Nov 11, 2016

Contributor

@JouvinLea I am merging this now since all checks pass. Note that I slightly changed the API of the IRFStacker class in my last PR. The methods are now called stack_edisp and stack_aeff to be consistent with the SpectrumObservationStacker.

Contributor

joleroi commented Nov 11, 2016

@JouvinLea I am merging this now since all checks pass. Note that I slightly changed the API of the IRFStacker class in my last PR. The methods are now called stack_edisp and stack_aeff to be consistent with the SpectrumObservationStacker.

@joleroi joleroi merged commit dd16ffb into gammapy:master Nov 11, 2016

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@cdeil cdeil changed the title from add IRFstack Class to Add IRFStacker class Nov 18, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment