Skip to content
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

Py3, flake8, make a package, and remove characteristics #14

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 17, 2020
Merged

Conversation

jeanconn
Copy link
Contributor

@jeanconn jeanconn commented Oct 12, 2020

Py3, flake8, make a package, and remove characteristics

Right now this is reading the aca model spec from the starcheck package installed in SKA but the plan would be to set it to use the new xija code (previously it was using chandra_models directly, but I'm getting the impression we don't want to install that as a package).

Like the Ska.report_ranges update (that was prompted by this), this doesn't clean up the old cruft (or bad logic or old formatted strings), but does make the code use the right modules (for example, kadi commanded states and no sybase).

@taldcroft
Copy link
Member

This looks reasonable from a 2-minute glance. What about testing (install and functionality thereafter)?

@jeanconn
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeanconn commented Oct 13, 2020

That's somewhat a question of "what do we want?". I ran it on the side from the beginning of the year with a local rename of the task from "perigee_health_plots" to "perigee_health_plots_py3" to make

https://cxc.cfa.harvard.edu/mta/ASPECT/perigee_health_plots_py3/

But if figured in the end we'd probably want this new code to just write into the old area but not overwrite the old months.
And then I don't know what our plan is for ska3 or shiny crontasks stuff just now. This could run out of ska3 if we make a package for Ska.report_ranges, make this a conda package too, and install in ska3-flight. Otherwise, similar process for shiny. The ska2 perigee_health_plots job is disabled by heart attack now I think.

Copy link
Contributor

@javierggt javierggt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same here: I think we would need .git_archival.txt and .gitattributes files

@jeanconn
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sure. Files added (though we probably need a good demo package so I will stop forgetting. I suppose I could have pushed those directly to master too as they aren't controversial or really tied to the PR).

Copy link
Member

@taldcroft taldcroft left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks fine to me. For something like this the proof is in the pudding, to see if all the downstream machinery works on this to get a functioning installed package in shiny. Since there is no real consequence if it fails I would say to just merge this now.

@jeanconn
Copy link
Contributor Author

The proof is always in the eating.

Anyway, I don't actually know what is running for shiny build for downstream machinery. I was tossing stuff into the build list because I saw that in the old build :

https://github.com/sot/skare3_tools/blob/master/docker/centos5-builder/files/build.sh

but I don't know how to test-sort-of-alike at this point for shiny.

@jeanconn jeanconn merged commit 0a0ddd1 into master Oct 17, 2020
@jeanconn jeanconn deleted the py3 branch October 17, 2020 15:51
@jeanconn
Copy link
Contributor Author

And yeah, this all still looks broken: I'm having trouble with SCM finding a version on the conda-built package. I thought perhaps I needed to make a release (and might as well merge and do it from master) so I did that, but will need more changes for it to work.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants