Add docstring tests to CI

[hugobuddel]

See AstarVienna/DevOps#36 and #105

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 74.27%. Comparing base (815dc2d) to head (790c83a).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #106   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   74.27%   74.27%           
=======================================
  Files          30       30           
  Lines        1485     1485           
=======================================
  Hits         1103     1103           
  Misses        382      382           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[teutoburg]

Why not just call the DevOps workflow? I thought that was the whole point of AstarVienna/DevOps#36?

Also, we could put this call in the existing tests.yml. Also, I don't think we need a workflow_call here.

[hugobuddel]

Why not just call the DevOps workflow? I thought that was the whole point of AstarVienna/DevOps#36?

Uh yes, this doesn't make sense. Not sure what I was thinking

[hugobuddel]

I don't really have time to do this properly now, and it is low priority, so I'm probably just going to leave this 'open' for long enough to move you from 'hey nice addition', to 'frustration that @hugobuddel leaves these PRs hanging so long', to indifference. Just a heads-up.

[teutoburg]

Mind if I hijack your branch and (attempt to) "do it properly" when I find time in the near future? 🙂

[hugobuddel]

Mind if I hijack your branch and (attempt to) "do it properly" when I find time in the near future? 🙂

Yeah sure. Wanted to add that. Feel free to directly commit to it or rebase it or whatever 😺

[teutoburg]

Since you gave me a free hand in rebasing this, I decided to just drop the commit that added the (imo) unnecessary workflow file, avoiding it being deleted in the (almost) very next commit. This also has the advantage that the file should not show up in the Actions tab of this repo, which seems to sometimes keep old workflow files, not sure why.

But now I finally got one of those "We went looking everywhere, but couldn’t find those commits.", so at least I now know what you mean with that 🙃

[teutoburg]

Now we get "ValueError: Quantity truthiness is ambiguous, especially for logarithmic units and temperatures. Use explicit comparisons." in the updated tests. I believe that has been fixed elsewhere?

[hugobuddel]

Thanks for fixing this.

Yeah that Quantity Truthiness is fixed in AstarVienna/speXtra#57 but we have not released a new speXtra yet. It is kinda fine that things fail with the 'updated dependencies' test, as the goal of that is to learn about such problems early on. But on github we cannot mark tests as "please mark this specific test as failed but do not affect the combined test results". Oh well, incentivizes us to fix things. But it is unrelated to this PR.

Now it is unclear who should review and merge this. So I'm just going to merge it.

It would be 'interesting' to roll this out to the other repositories.