Uploaded image for project: 'Request For Comments'
  1. Request For Comments
  2. RFC-228

Rename obs_test to obs_example

    Details

    • Type: RFC
    • Status: Withdrawn
    • Resolution: Done
    • Component/s: DM
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Now that obs package test cases are being lifted into obs_base, the obs_test package name is making referring to those tests confusing. Also, in the current obs_test tests are comments like:

      # we only import TestMapper from lsst.obs.test, but use the namespace to hide it from pytest
      import lsst.obs.test
      

      obs_test is really an example obs package, so it would be better named as "obs_example". This rename would also include changing lsst.obs.test -> lsst.obs.example and TestMapper -> ExampleMapper, as well as renaming it in the other packages that use obs_test.

      I'm in favor of this even though it means I'll no longer get to call the new obs_test file test_obs_test.py...

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            rowen Russell Owen added a comment -

            obs_test already has documentation: http://lsst-web.ncsa.illinois.edu/doxygen/x_masterDoxyDoc/obs_test.html

            I'm not saying it's perfect – suggestions for improvement are most welcome. But in general I'm in favor of the main page of the doc directory containing the comprehensive information. Adding a ReadMe is a good idea, especially now that we use github, but I think it should generally be brief and point to the "real" documentation.

            As to obs_test as an example: at present it's a mediocre example (since it was not designed for that purpose); it builds its camera in a very nonstandard fashion. But I suppose it could be made to be a better example. Still, it's main purpose is to provide a repo of test data and an associated camera, so I am against renaming it.

            Show
            rowen Russell Owen added a comment - obs_test already has documentation: http://lsst-web.ncsa.illinois.edu/doxygen/x_masterDoxyDoc/obs_test.html I'm not saying it's perfect – suggestions for improvement are most welcome. But in general I'm in favor of the main page of the doc directory containing the comprehensive information. Adding a ReadMe is a good idea, especially now that we use github, but I think it should generally be brief and point to the "real" documentation. As to obs_test as an example: at present it's a mediocre example (since it was not designed for that purpose); it builds its camera in a very nonstandard fashion. But I suppose it could be made to be a better example. Still, it's main purpose is to provide a repo of test data and an associated camera, so I am against renaming it.
            Hide
            krughoff Simon Krughoff added a comment -

            One final comment from me. I do think the fact that we have to play games to keep the modules hidden from the testing framework indicates a bit of an issue. The fact is that obs_test may not be an example, but it's also not a test. I facilitates tests. In fact, most of the tests in obs_test are actually testing Butler/Mapper things.

            Show
            krughoff Simon Krughoff added a comment - One final comment from me. I do think the fact that we have to play games to keep the modules hidden from the testing framework indicates a bit of an issue. The fact is that obs_test may not be an example, but it's also not a test. I facilitates tests. In fact, most of the tests in obs_test are actually testing Butler/Mapper things.
            Hide
            ktl Kian-Tat Lim added a comment -

            There shouldn't be many tests in obs_test, although it's a handy place to do some end-to-end testing of the Butler/Mapper/CameraMapper/obs system.

            How about obs_mock instead?

            Show
            ktl Kian-Tat Lim added a comment - There shouldn't be many tests in obs_test , although it's a handy place to do some end-to-end testing of the Butler/Mapper/CameraMapper/obs system. How about obs_mock instead?
            Hide
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment -

            obs_test currently has two tests that won't get lifted up into obs_base: testPolicyInRepo.py and testPexPolicyToButlerPolicy.py.

            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - obs_test currently has two tests that won't get lifted up into obs_base: testPolicyInRepo.py and testPexPolicyToButlerPolicy.py .
            Hide
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment -

            Given the opposition to this proposal, I am withdrawing it.

            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - Given the opposition to this proposal, I am withdrawing it.

              People

              • Assignee:
                Parejkoj John Parejko
                Reporter:
                Parejkoj John Parejko
                Watchers:
                John Parejko, John Swinbank, Kian-Tat Lim, Michael Wood-Vasey, Nate Pease, Russell Owen, Simon Krughoff, Tim Jenness
              • Votes:
                1 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                8 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved:
                  Planned End:

                  Summary Panel