Eero Vaher

The instructions in #14818 describe addressing currently ignored Ruff rules and are less useful for normal development work. Furthermore, they were written for inexperienced contributors. My idea was that when...

`AstropyDeprecationWarning` used to be a subclass of `DeprecationWarning`, but that was changed in #1871. The discussion there mentions Python 2.7, but the reasoning also applies to Python 3.2-3.6. However, Python...

Is there consensus about how to proceed? I don't care too much if `AstropyDeprecationWarning` is a subclass of `DeprecationWarning` or `FutureWarning` because we will be able to reduce the amount...

[PEP 565](https://peps.python.org/pep-0565/#additional-use-case-for-futurewarning) contains the following recommendation: > For library and framework authors that want to ensure their API compatibility warnings are more reliably seen by their users, the recommendation is...

Rebased as requested by https://groups.google.com/g/astropy-dev/c/2y2vVj1go0w

Looks like it would be good to split this pull request by `astropy` sub-package.

My impression of how this works in practice (in `astropy`, where the different sub-packages have different maintainers) is that it would be best to open separate pull requests for separate...

I'm not answering exactly the question @mhvk asked, but I think this will still be relevant for the discussion. The way I see it there are three tiers to typing....

A good thing to do sooner rather than later would be to address the remaining violations of the Ruff ANN ruleset: https://github.com/astropy/astropy/blob/6568d90661f12a144ec9a2ccc814a3e2eaaf8a82/.ruff.toml#L6-L11 Note that we have configured Ruff to ignore...

What @taldcroft describes seems to be very similar to what I referred to as tier 1 in an [earlier comment of mine](https://github.com/astropy/astropy/issues/15170#issuecomment-1843098373). One of the reasons implementing that level of...