Tickets/preops 3763

[emanehab99]

Tests were failing because for some reason some bokeh models are owned by multiple documents. This happens when scheduler dashboard and prenight dashboard both run in tests. Resetting bokeh output before and after tests fixes the issue

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 18 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (284673b) 12.04% compared to head (fca5856) 12.41%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #35      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   12.04%   12.41%   +0.36%     
==========================================
  Files          39       39              
  Lines        3071     3078       +7     
  Branches      467      466       -1     
==========================================
+ Hits          370      382      +12     
+ Misses       2692     2687       -5     
  Partials        9        9              

Files	Coverage Δ
tests/test_scheduler_dashboard.py	97.64% <100.00%> (+8.89%)	⬆️
schedview/app/scheduler_dashboard/__init__.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...iew/app/scheduler_dashboard/scheduler_dashboard.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

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

[ehneilsen]

Mostly, this looks good! I just have a few minor stylistic requests.

First, there are some public functions that do not have docstrings. In general, a function should either have a docstring, or marked as private (have a preceeding underscore), or both.

Second, some of the docstrings that are there have their summary sentences on a different line from the opening tripple quote. This messes up some of the doc extraction tools. See https://developer.lsst.io/python/numpydoc.html .

Finally, there are still a few extraneous "print" statements in there, obviously included for debugging. If they should be there long term, they should probably be logging messages instead.

In each of these cases, I just marked one example with a comment, but there are multiple instances of each.

[ehneilsen]

Can you do a rebase onto main and resolve the resultant merge conflicts?

[emanehab99]

Can you do a rebase onto main and resolve the resultant merge conflicts?

Comments addressed. It should be up to date now.

[emanehab99]

I'm not sure what the ticks and crosses next to commits mean. That's what I did to rebase the branch

git checkout main
git pull 
git checkout tickets/PREOPS-3763
git rebase main
git pull
git push

[timj]

You made one mistake in:

git checkout main
git pull 
git checkout tickets/PREOPS-3763
git rebase main
git pull
git push

It should be:

git checkout main
git pull 
git checkout tickets/PREOPS-3763
git rebase main
git push -f

That git pull at the end forces a redownload of the original ticket branch and git makes a merge commit to deal with them being different commits because you had rebased locally.

The -f tells git that the local version is the proper one.

[emanehab99]

You made one mistake in:

git checkout main
git pull 
git checkout tickets/PREOPS-3763
git rebase main
git pull
git push

It should be:

git checkout main
git pull 
git checkout tickets/PREOPS-3763
git rebase main
git push -f

That git pull at the end forces a redownload of the original ticket branch and git makes a merge commit to deal with them being different commits because you had rebased locally.

The -f tells git that the local version is the proper one.

Thank you. I've done that now but I'm not happy with the commit history (repeating my commits multiple times). Is there a way to clean it?

[timj]

You can do git rebase -i main and squash related commits.

[emanehab99]

You can do git rebase -i main and squash related commits.

That worked! Looks much better. Thank you so much :)