Updated references to datamodels in stpipe, comments. #9
Conversation
| @@ -602,7 +602,7 @@ def get_reference_file_model(self, input_file, reference_file_type): | |||
|
|
|||
| Returns | |||
| ------- | |||
| reference_file_model : jwst_lib.models.ModelBase instance | |||
| reference_file_model : jwst.datamodels.ModelBase instance | |||
| A model to access the contents of the reference file. | |||
| """ | |||
| from jwst import datamodels | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be "from .. import datamodels"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm pretty sure that import was already there and is not really part of this pull request. I have no strong beliefs about which is best, relative or absolute. Would you like another pull request?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can change the import in this existing branch and push again to origin. It will show up as a separate commit. But yeah, we want to use relative imports.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The consensus during today's hackathon seemed to be that relative imports were preferred, just in case someone accidentally has something else defined as "jwst".
|
OK, not sure if you guys saw my additional commit, but I went in and changed all the existing datamodels imports from absolute to relative. I should add, I pushed the commit to jaytmiller and it auto-magically showed up here, no need to make a new branch. |
|
👍 |
Get my repo up to date
…l_replace fixes to save individual models with expected names
I updated two modules in stpipe from references to jwst_lib.models to jwst.datamodels. The changes involved comments and a log message.
Based on feedback from Howard, I also changed all the existing datamodels imports from absolute to relative.