P. L. Lim
P. L. Lim
I can probably take a stab at this. See https://github.com/astropy/specreduce/pull/260
Do we need a `Wow Ambitious` label? 😆
So with this patch, comparing existing oldestdeps run on `main` on 2024-09-17 with what tox-uv is pulling, here are the differences, FWIW (if not mentioned, they stay the same): *...
@astrofrog and @Cadair , any thoughts on using this over https://github.com/OpenAstronomy/minimum_dependencies , since part of your contract also involves infrastructure (i.e., https://github.com/astropy/astropy-project/blob/main/finance/proposal-calls/cycle4/aperio_general.md)? 🙏
Ping one more time: @WilliamJamieson @Cadair @astrofrog @saimn 🙏
1. There is an unchecked box under TODO in original post. Does that need to be done before this PR is really ready? 2. @WilliamJamieson , you were asking about...
I think these should also happen together: * Remove "positional defaults" license file from `licenses`. * Put a `/` in the affected function signatures to ensure `z` cannot be passed...
> this needs to wait until astropy v7.0.x is branched out Longer than that. Also have to wait for v7.1.x and be sure then `main` is actually going to be...
Maybe a little too early for a PR? According to https://peps.python.org/pep-0719/#schedule , stable release not till Oct 2024. I think we can wait for RC.
> as soon as our required dependencies Strictly speaking, that is only numpy and pyerfa. So you might not want to use all the `devdeps`?