Repository navigation
Remove duplicate call to update_header - #8563
Conversation
|
Is this backportable? |
|
Most likely yes, it is just one line, and #5053 came in v1.2 so it should be fine to backport to 2.0. |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #8563 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 86.81% 86.81% +<.01%
==========================================
Files 386 386
Lines 58162 58161 -1
Branches 1060 1060
==========================================
+ Hits 50493 50494 +1
+ Misses 7054 7052 -2
Partials 615 615
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Tests passed but 😬 |
|
@saimn , you marked this as refactoring, not a bug. Generally speaking, we don't backport "refactoring". And if this is a bug, please update the labels and add a change log entry. Thanks! |
|
@pllim - This is not a bug for me, there is no issue caused by this, so I'm fine with not backporting. |
|
I agree with the not-backporting. Just in case (this is io.fits after all) this has some weird edge cases where it breaks some code. I think this is fine. |
@MSeifert04 , do you want to formalize it and hit "approve"? 😄 |
|
Maybe we could leave a bread-crump comment there that the data setter actually updates the header? This is completely optional, just to avoid potential confusion?! |
|
I updated the comment just above.
Maybe, but I love how the comment says that bitpix/bscale/bzero will be updated when setting the data, and just after it sets again those values in case they changed 😬 |
|
🤞 🤞 🤞 |
See https://github.com/astropy/astropy/pull/5053/files#r66576117
I stumbled upon this while looking at #5559,
update_headeris called twice (it is called in the.datasetter).