Make asdf standard 1.6.0 stable (default) #1744
Draft
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
I milestoned this PR for asdf 4.0 because it's a rather major change.
Making 1.6.0 stable will require:
Phase 0 (at any time):
Phase 1:
Phase 2:
tag
in the schemas asdf-standard#421Phase 3:
Unfortunately at this point most of the schema repo CIs will be broken (as will asdf-astropy CI) due to the intertwined nature of these packages.
Phase 4:
asdf-wcs-schemas
version spacetelescope/gwcs#491Phase 5:
Much of the above is due to updates to the ndarray schema:
All schemas that
$ref
ndarray (like quantity) then need a version bump and so on...This is further complicated by
quantity-1.1.0
currently existing in 2 released packages:(because of an incomplete effort to split
unit
fits
table
andtime
out of the core).The approach taken here is to decomission asdf-unit-schemas. asdf-standard will continue to provide updates to the
unit
(and other non-core
) schemas. This seems sensible as these schemas are highly interdependent. More details can be found in: asdf-format/asdf-standard#422One question that occupied a lot of my thought was "should we change some of the
$ref
s totag
s?" On one hand this could make migrations like this easier (if every ndarray$ref
was instead a wildcardtag
(ndarray-1.*
) most of these schemas would not need to be updated. However, this links the tag to the schema which has a few downsides:tag
link to that tag will only be valid for asdf-standard 1.6.0).tag
links make "duck typing" with a schema very difficult if not impossible.For example
unit/quantity
contains a$ref
link tounit/unit
. This means thatasdf-astropy
can use a differently tagged unit (astropy/unint
for non-vo units) and still produce a validunit/quantity
(see the wfi schema in rad as an example). If insteadunit/quantity
used atag
link tounit/unit
, this same "duck typing" would not work with a differently tagged unit.asdf-astropy
would have to instead:unit/unit
tag (this would break the tag-schema mapping defined in the standardunit
manifest making any file produced with this approach likely to be incompatible with any other implementation or with other libraries that might choose to implement units)astropy/quantity
for non-vo units (and so on up the tree of schema references...)astropy/unit
tag to thequantity
schema (further linking tags and schemas and requiring addition standard schema updates for "downstream" libraries).At the moment I am of the mind that keeping the schemas as separate from the tags as possible is the better option (so
$ref
instead oftag
). This allows the schemas to function even if they are treated as normal "jsonschema"s. Additionally thetag
validator behavior seems loosely defined in the standard where it states "Implementation of this validator is optional and depends on details of the YAML parser." For similar reasons the aboveasdf-transform-schemas
PR did not rely on the feature in asdf to use multiple schemas in a tag definition (to allow the many transforms that$ref
the transform schema to instead include them in the manifest).Both
stdatamodels
(datamodels) andrad
use metaschemas based off ofasdf-schema-1.0.0
(which is updated to1.1.0
in asdf-format/asdf-standard#422). As neither of these packages version schemas updating the metaschema version will force these packages to use exclusively the1.6.0
standard (which will almost certainly cause issues if old versions of asdf/asdf-standard are used). Instead, I suggest we not update the metaschemas (and keep them using the oldasdf-schema-1.0.0
metaschema). The only downside is the lack offloat16
support in thedatatype
keyword validator. This seems like an acceptable limitation for the time being. Once asdf standard 1.6.0 is stable and the asdf version that sets it as the default agrees with the minimum required version for each of those packages the metaschemas can be updated.Checklist: