Axel Donath

Thanks @moralejo for the feature proposal! Alternatively one can also fit the background normalization and spectral shape using various built-in models, such as: - [PowerLawNormSpectralModel](https://docs.gammapy.org/0.20/api/gammapy.modeling.models.PowerLawNormSpectralModel.html#gammapy.modeling.models.PowerLawNormSpectralModel) - [PiecewiseNormSpectraModel](https://docs.gammapy.org/0.20/api/gammapy.modeling.models.PiecewiseNormSpectralModel.html#gammapy.modeling.models.PiecewiseNormSpectralModel) This effectively treats...

Thanks @moralejo, I now understand better what you are trying to achieve. > Is that background normalization independent for on and off? No it isn't. In case of a on-off...

Thanks @moralejo, now I think I understood what you are trying to achieve. As far as I can tell there is currently no simple way to achieve something like this...

Thanks @SeiyaNozaki! As far as I understood you basically implemented a ring background estimation method for spectral analysis. This is a long open feature request in Gammapy (https://github.com/gammapy/gammapy/issues/1112). It would...

Form the Gammapy side this would require adapting our likelihood API. I think we should give us at least 0.5 year for that. I'll set the 1.2 milestone here.

How would it differ from https://docs.gammapy.org/0.19/api/gammapy.modeling.models.LightCurveTemplateTemporalModel.html#gammapy.modeling.models.LightCurveTemplateTemporalModel?

> But why do we add the LightCurve prefix for this specific model? It makes it a bit hard to find. I agree, probably we had in mind there could...

Thanks @luca-giunti, I agree this would be very nice clean up work for the tests! In terms of code organisation we could maybe introduce a dedicated `fixture.py` file per sub-package...

@registerrier I think the structure of the tests is not a priority for v1.0. However it should be after v1.0, so we will establish the API and feature completeness for...

For v1.0 this will remain as a documentation example.