Skip to content

Conversation

@stscirij
Copy link
Contributor

@stscirij stscirij commented Mar 28, 2025

No JP ticket or issue for this fix

This PR puts back the _all statement that got inadvertently removed in a previous PR

Tasks

  • If you have a specific reviewer in mind, tag them.
  • add a build milestone, i.e. Build 12.0 (use the latest build if not sure)
  • Does this PR change user-facing code / API? (if not, label with no-changelog-entry-needed)
    • write news fragment(s) in changes/: echo "changed something" > changes/<PR#>.<changetype>.rst (see changelog readme for instructions)
    • update or add relevant tests
    • update relevant docstrings and / or docs/ page
    • start a regression test and include a link to the running job (click here for instructions)
      • Do truth files need to be updated ("okified")?
        • after the reviewer has approved these changes, run okify_regtests to update the truth files
  • if a JIRA ticket exists, make sure it is resolved properly

@stscirij stscirij requested a review from a team as a code owner March 28, 2025 14:54
@stscirij stscirij requested a review from a team as a code owner March 28, 2025 14:57
@melanieclarke melanieclarke added this to the Build 12.0 milestone Mar 28, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@melanieclarke melanieclarke left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, thanks Robert! No need to run regression tests for this.

Copy link
Collaborator

@pllim pllim left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a small comment. Thanks!

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
Restore __all__ definition that was removed in an earlier PR
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If user won't notice anything, not sure if this actually needs a change log. I'll leave that up to you. If you want to keep it, here is a suggestion.

Suggested change
Restore __all__ definition that was removed in an earlier PR
Restore ``__all__`` definition that was removed in an earlier PR.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, I kept it with your suggestion!

@tapastro tapastro enabled auto-merge (squash) March 28, 2025 15:22
@spacetelescope spacetelescope deleted a comment from lumberbot-app bot Mar 28, 2025
@tapastro
Copy link
Contributor

@meeseeksdev backport to release/1.18.x

meeseeksmachine pushed a commit to meeseeksmachine/jwst that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2025
@tapastro tapastro merged commit f265312 into spacetelescope:main Mar 28, 2025
25 checks passed
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 28, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 74.69%. Comparing base (86af1f2) to head (31efdf8).
Report is 742 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9338   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   74.69%   74.69%           
=======================================
  Files         369      368    -1     
  Lines       37117    37107   -10     
=======================================
- Hits        27723    27718    -5     
+ Misses       9394     9389    -5     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

tapastro added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2025
…f __all__) (#9339)

Co-authored-by: Robert Jedrzejewski <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Tyler Pauly <[email protected]>
@pllim
Copy link
Collaborator

pllim commented Mar 28, 2025

Just for accurate bookkeeping, does that mean milestone for this PR and its backport is really 11.3, not 12.0?

@melanieclarke
Copy link
Collaborator

Just for accurate bookkeeping, does that mean milestone for this PR and its backport is really 11.3, not 12.0?

Yes, it should be 11.3. I'll update it.

@melanieclarke melanieclarke modified the milestones: Build 12.0, Build 11.3 Mar 31, 2025
taylorbell57 pushed a commit to taylorbell57/jwst that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2025
taylorbell57 pushed a commit to taylorbell57/jwst that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants