Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RCAL-965 Invoke converter from_tvac_raw to enable processing of TVAC/FPS data #1596

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

stscieisenhamer
Copy link
Collaborator

@stscieisenhamer stscieisenhamer commented Jan 30, 2025

Resolves RCAL-965

This PR addresses the issue that TVAC/FPS data cannot be run through the pipeline, mostly due to the fact that the TVAC-related datamodels are frozen. The method ScienceRawModel.from_tvac_raw is utilized to ensure that both science and TVAC/FPS data can be processed by the ELP.

The conversion happens in the DQ Init step at the same point that the RampModel consistency is done.

Tasks

  • request a review from someone specific, to avoid making the maintainers review every PR
  • add a build milestone, i.e. 24Q4_B15 (use the latest build if not sure)
  • Does this PR change user-facing code / API? (if not, label with no-changelog-entry-needed)
    • write news fragment(s) in changes/: echo "changed something" > changes/<PR#>.<changetype>.rst (see below for change types)
    • update or add relevant tests
    • update relevant docstrings and / or docs/ page
    • start a regression test and include a link to the running job (click here for instructions)
      • Do truth files need to be updated ("okified")?
        • after the reviewer has approved these changes, run okify_regtests to update the truth files
  • if a JIRA ticket exists, make sure it is resolved properly
news fragment change types...
  • changes/<PR#>.general.rst: infrastructure or miscellaneous change
  • changes/<PR#>.docs.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.stpipe.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.associations.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.scripts.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.mosaic_pipeline.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.patch_match.rst

steps

  • changes/<PR#>.dq_init.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.saturation.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.refpix.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.linearity.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.dark_current.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.jump_detection.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.ramp_fitting.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.assign_wcs.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.flatfield.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.photom.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.flux.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.source_detection.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.tweakreg.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.skymatch.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.outlier_detection.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.resample.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.source_catalog.rst

@stscieisenhamer stscieisenhamer requested a review from a team as a code owner January 30, 2025 20:12
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 78.15%. Comparing base (826a972) to head (2b5acd8).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
romancal/dq_init/dq_init_step.py 60.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1596      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.16%   78.15%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         116      116              
  Lines        7643     7648       +5     
==========================================
+ Hits         5974     5977       +3     
- Misses       1669     1671       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@stscieisenhamer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Initial regression run

@braingram
Copy link
Collaborator

braingram commented Feb 5, 2025

Would you add a regression test that runs the exposure pipeline with one of the tvac files?

@github-actions github-actions bot added the dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file label Feb 5, 2025
assert diff.identical, diff.report()


@pytest.mark.soctests
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks like mostly a copy of test_wfi_image_pipeline.py. If the tests beyond this point in the file are not needed to satisfy the commented DMS requirements I'd say removing everything in this file after this commented line (64) makes sense.

If there is reason to keep the additional tests in this file at least test_elp_input_dm should be removed as it doesn't process tvac data and looks to be an exact duplicate of the one in test_wfi_image_pipeline.py.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants