You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
After applying the fix in pull request #1426 I found that the remaining list methods don't work as intended. The origin of this error seems to be that the IRSA ibe service is images only, so that level is trivial and skipped, as you can confirm by browsing the ibe schema manually. I'm proposing a fix to this issue (and the rest of the list methods) in a new pull request momentarily, where I render the list_datasets function trivial and bypass it elsewhere.
The rationale behind this approach is that I assume that the astroquery API requires the module to have the list_missions, list_datasets, and list_tables functions. If that's so, it seems that the most consistent way to satisfy this requirement is the approach proposed here.
This issue is primarily for discussion of whether this approach is the correct one, and coordinate alternate fixes, if needed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We can discuss the code in detail on that PR, but the astroquery API does not require these functions. They should not be present unless they're useful.
After applying the fix in pull request #1426 I found that the remaining list methods don't work as intended. The origin of this error seems to be that the IRSA ibe service is images only, so that level is trivial and skipped, as you can confirm by browsing the ibe schema manually. I'm proposing a fix to this issue (and the rest of the list methods) in a new pull request momentarily, where I render the
list_datasets
function trivial and bypass it elsewhere.The rationale behind this approach is that I assume that the astroquery API requires the module to have the
list_missions
,list_datasets
, andlist_tables
functions. If that's so, it seems that the most consistent way to satisfy this requirement is the approach proposed here.This issue is primarily for discussion of whether this approach is the correct one, and coordinate alternate fixes, if needed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: