Update signatures for NWB2

[ageorgou]

Will fix #8.

• [x] Re-enable testing of signatures of Travis
• [x] Hash everything as consistently as possible (in particular any new attributes)
• [x] Ignore varying output (@object_id attributes, ?)
• [x] Update signatures of sampled and full datasets in the repository

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #22 into adapt-to-updated-libs will increase coverage by 23.65%. The diff coverage is 66.66%.

@@                    Coverage Diff                     @@
##           adapt-to-updated-libs      #22       +/-   ##
==========================================================
+ Coverage                   25.9%   49.56%   +23.65%     
==========================================================
  Files                         12       12               
  Lines                       1490     1491        +1     
  Branches                     240      241        +1     
==========================================================
+ Hits                         386      739      +353     
+ Misses                      1086      724      -362     
- Partials                      18       28       +10

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
tests/test_labview_import.py	74.46% <ø> (+30.71%)	:arrow_up:
src/silverlabnwb/signature.py	55.45% <66.66%> (+38.02%)	:arrow_up:
src/silverlabnwb/nwb_file.py	92.45% <0%> (+53.45%)	:arrow_up:

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update f43346b...1576a72. Read the comment docs.

[alessandrofelder]

I haven't got the full Labview folder for 170317_10_11_01 or 170322_14_06_43 to regenerate their signatures from scratch...

[ageorgou]

The signature file161215_15_34_21.sig2 is missing the section on the EyeCam acquisition because I didn't have the data locally! I only realised this belatedly, and to keep things from getting too confusing (more work has been done since then), I suggest adding this back in a new PR.

Assuming that, this is ready for review!

[ageorgou]

The files are useful for checking a variety of different input data, especially since we don't have many unit tests. We could be more selective, although if they don't take too long to run it doesn't hurt to have more!