Mark Nestor Costantini

@JohannesBuchner I observed the same problem. Running with `vectorized=True` on a multicore machine lead to an excessive use of memory. In my case for a fit with 30 parameters on...

> This was not done in this PR, but I changed it since I don't think we should start getting in the habit of suppressing warnings if there is another...

> @comane I see you addressed the CI fails (as pointed out by @Radonirinaunimi), but could you rename p_T2 to pT2? Sure, I am not sure why though? Who wrote...

Hi @andreab1997, I addressed most of the comments that you left, as well as those that I wrote myself. There is one main issue with this PR at present, namely,...

> Just to understand, this issue is only there if you use the CLI or even if you write your own runcard and template? I think it's there if I...

@scarlehoff, once the tests pass, this is ready to merge in my opinion

> The only general question I have is, why do you need so many extra functionality under `inconsisent_closuretest`? I would have naively thought that many of the estimators could also...

Hi @scarlehoff, just to make sure I understand this correctly. Would you like to have some rules in `cuts/filter.yml` that impose cuts in x for the positivity datasets? Another options...

Ok, I see. Then I think that it's probably not enough to just remove the `load_commondata` from `LagrangeSetSpec`, it seems that positivity datasets are assigned a `Cuts` class whereas DataSetSpecs...

Can this be closed or do we still have `SKIP` uncertainties with the new format?