Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 27, 2025. It is now read-only.

1D responces using PSF model - #4

Open
nocturnalastro wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
1Dpsf
Open

1D responces using PSF model#4
nocturnalastro wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
1Dpsf

Conversation

@nocturnalastro

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

If a rsp is supplied then the model is wrapped in a sherpa PSF model. This is only done to the sherpa fit model and not the input/returned astropy model.

1D and 2D rsp's are the same but this branch has an statement which makes the rsp=None if the dataset is 2D and the 2D

@hamogu

hamogu commented Aug 19, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

There is clearly a lot going on in this PR. Is it intended that all the generated images are included in the git repro? Won't they be generated by rtd when the docs are build?

@nocturnalastro

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

These are the all the commits I'll squash them today and no they shouldn't be there i'll remove them

@nocturnalastro

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

I think it would be easier to pull master and rewrite the code than trying to fix this with a rebase

@olaurino

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I think it would be easier to pull master and rewrite the code than trying to fix this with a rebase

I am not sure I follow. Could you be more specific?

@nocturnalastro

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@olaurino fixing the commits will probably take longer than just writting the code from what exists in master and remaking the branch

@olaurino

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

You can easily squash all commits, then you can fix any conflicts and then, if you want, you can split all the code in cleaner commits or in different branches if that's what you want. I am not sure what you mean by "fixing" though, so maybe I am missing something. Please feel free to skype me if you want to talk about it.

@nocturnalastro

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

There's a lot more commits here than there should be, not sure how they ended up here.
I'm just thinking it will take me less time to rewrite the code than solving all the conflicts, each time rebase finds one. Most of the conflicts we're pretty easy to resolve. I don't think my git-fu is quite up to snuff yet.

@olaurino

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Which is why this might be a good time to improve your git-fu ;)

Rather than rebasing, simply squash all commits first in the current branch into a single commit. Then do a diff, and see whether what you see is more or less what you would like to get. Then start a new branch off master and cherry-pick the squashed commit (with --no-commit or something similar). Now it's as if you were editing new code. You can either commit everything or use git add -p to select which chunks to include in individual commits.

@nocturnalastro

nocturnalastro commented Aug 19, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Cheers @olaurino It looks much nicer now :)
I missed the keyword arg ... so close

@coveralls

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-1.9%) to 24.638% when pulling 00fc661 on 1Dpsf into 7a75779 on master.

@olaurino

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Regarding coverage, have you tried adding --cov-report=xml to the arguments of the test command?

Base automatically changed from master to main March 11, 2021 11:44
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants