Noxcal prepare release #481
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
* partial fix for #93. Should allow for one spw at a time * fixes #93. Adds workaround for casacore/python-casacore#130 * added future-fstrings * correctly named future-fstrings * ...and install it for all pythons * back to mainstream sharedarray * lowered message verbosity * droppping support for python<3.6 * Issues 427 and 429 (#430) * Fixes #427 * Fixes #429 * Update __init__.py Bump version * Update Jenkinsfile.sh (#447) * Update Jenkinsfile.sh Remove python 2 building * Update Jenkinsfile.sh * Issue 431 (#432) * Beginning of nobeam functionality. * Remove duplicated source provider. * Change syntax for python 2.7 compatibility. * Update montblanc version in setup to avoid installation woes. Co-authored-by: JSKenyon <jonosken@gmail.com> * Remove two uses of future_fstrings. * make pypi compatible (#446) * make pypi compatible * error * Update setup.py Only support up to v0.6.1 of montblanc * Update setup.py Co-authored-by: Benjamin Hugo <bennahugo@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: JSKenyon <jskenyon007@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: JSKenyon <jonathan.simon.kenyon@gmail.com> * Update __init__.py * Fix warning formatting Co-authored-by: Oleg Smirnov <osmirnov@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Benjamin Hugo <bennahugo@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: JSKenyon <jskenyon007@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: JSKenyon <jonosken@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Gijs Molenaar <gijs@pythonic.nl> Co-authored-by: JSKenyon <jonathan.simon.kenyon@gmail.com>
…Properly implemented scalar updates
* fixes to AIPS leakage plotter (more table format support); started an AIPS bandpass plotter but this is WIP * add check for INDE value in PRTAB leakages * changed to hierarchical config
|
Wait, something is off here. The noxcal branch was merged - why is the diff on this PR so large? Maybe merging in master/rebasing on master would be sensible? Edit: It may just be that this was branched a long time ago. |
|
Yeah I'm not sure what's the deal. Did you make this branch, @JSKenyon? Or did @Athanaseus? |
|
Actually looks like the diff is almost entirely due to the |
I think by merging in master, the diff was minimized. Does this supercede #458? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.