Closed jdtsmith closed 2 years ago
Also needs the testing parameters update as this changes the results for M101.
I'm not as familiar with the test structure; can someone else take a look at that?
For now, it might be best to accept failing tests and merge if we have good confidence that it is just needing to update the cached fit values. There are now multiple PRs that have this test failure. Then I can do a "quick" PR to fix the failing tests after the different merges are done.
Or another solution is that I could provide the needed code snippet that would generate the lines that would need to be cut/pasted in to the test function.
Thoughts?
If we have a few ongoing changes in this category, perhaps “clean up after” is the right approach. I demoed my own branch at the workshop yesterday so probably good to get some of these in.
Merging now. Will fix failing tests in a separate PR.
This is a simple fix for the overly generous 2x FWHM (see #174), which led to spurious fits. This simply hard-codes the 10% for now. In the near term, we plan to implement a new Instrument Pack/Science Pack with generator, making this code irrelevant.