[NEW FEATURE] Local position in the validation catalogue for MCCD
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
@tobias-liaudat is already working on this.
Since Jan 26, 2023.
Assessment
This issue has not been assessed yet.
Description
Hello,
I have noticed that in the MCCD catalogue the x and y positions are given on the global grid that MCCD is using for the multi-CCD approach. Due to this, the MCCD package is required to read the catalogue and transform back the positions to a local reference mining x and y on each CCDs. I think it could be nice to have the local positions directly in the catalogue to avoid the call to MCCD. That would simplify the validation a lot because the catalogue will follow the same format as PSFEx and we could have only one validation function instead of two. I think that could also simplify the comprehension of the catalogue by external users.
I see two ways to handle this:
- This can be done in the
merge_starcatmodule but I found that a bit sub-optimal because we will have one function for MCCD catalogues and one for PSFEx (like it is right now). - Do it in MCCD when it does the interpolation. Like that we could also simplify the
merge_starcatmodule. What I would propose is just to add one column for the LOCAL_POS along side the GLOBAL_POS so the user can choose which one to. It will not break the pipeline as it is and give time to update the different modules that are impacted.
One solution is only in ShapePipe the other is in MCCD. I have a preference for the second one. Let me know what you think 🙂
(Maybe this issue should be moved to the MCCD repo, let me know)
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 18
- Forks
- 14
- Avg merge
- 1d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 18
Getting set up
- Ships a Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
- Has a pull request template
- Read the contributing guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from CosmoStat/shapepipe
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 85/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 75/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 3/5 1-2 days Newbie friendliness 65/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 45/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
All issues in CosmoStat/shapepipe
Similar issues
-
bug status/needs-triage
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 86/100
prowler-cloud/prowler#12887 · 1 comment ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
area: desktop platform: macos priority: p3 status: ready type: enhancement
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 92/100
use-agent-os/agent-os#3484 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
-
bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 86/100
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python-contrib#5113 · 2 comments · 2 reactions ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
external
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
langchain-ai/docs#6255 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 72/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day