From a2b6ca8a089aee8b87591d719e1a720eefd98ccb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Eddie Schlafly <eschlafly@stsci.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 13:02:14 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Updates for galsim 2.5. (#87)

---
 pyproject.toml              | 2 +-
 romanisim/bandpass.py       | 6 ++----
 romanisim/tests/test_psf.py | 5 ++---
 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/pyproject.toml b/pyproject.toml
index c01fc15e..a21ed639 100644
--- a/pyproject.toml
+++ b/pyproject.toml
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ dependencies = [
     'astropy >=5.3',
     'crds >=10.3.1',
     'defusedxml >=0.5.0',
-    'galsim >=2.3.5',
+    'galsim >=2.5.0',
     'rad >=0.17.1',
     'roman_datamodels >=0.17.1',
     'gwcs >=0.18.1',
diff --git a/romanisim/bandpass.py b/romanisim/bandpass.py
index 92d38791..93d6e210 100644
--- a/romanisim/bandpass.py
+++ b/romanisim/bandpass.py
@@ -23,12 +23,10 @@
 # provide some translation dictionaries for the mapping from
 # the galsim bandpass names to the Roman bandpass names and vice versa.
 # it would be nice to be agnostic about which one we use.
-galsim_bandpasses = ['Z087', 'Y106', 'J129', 'H158', 'F184', 'W149']
+galsim_bandpasses = [
+    'R062', 'Z087', 'Y106', 'J129', 'H158', 'F184', 'K213', 'W146']
 galsim2roman_bandpass = {x: 'F' + x[1:] for x in galsim_bandpasses}
 roman2galsim_bandpass = {v: k for k, v in galsim2roman_bandpass.items()}
-# we should add some support for F213 (K) and F062.  That would require getting
-# zodiacal light estimates and maybe making a bandpass.
-# W149 is probably the same as F146 but we should compare.
 
 # provide some no-ops if we are given a key in the right bandpass
 galsim2roman_bandpass.update(**{k: k for k in roman2galsim_bandpass})
diff --git a/romanisim/tests/test_psf.py b/romanisim/tests/test_psf.py
index ba8f9fa8..b89aa8b7 100644
--- a/romanisim/tests/test_psf.py
+++ b/romanisim/tests/test_psf.py
@@ -43,6 +43,5 @@ def test_make_psf():
         assert totsum > 0.9
         # assert that image catches no more than 100% and no less than 90%
         # of flux?
-        assert np.min(im) > np.max(im) * (-1e-4)
-        # ideally nothing negative, though we could loosen this to, say,
-        # > -1e-3 * peak and I wouldn't feel too bad.
+        assert np.min(im) > np.max(im) * (-1e-3)
+        # ideally nothing negative