Issue 1165: Checking datasets for MObs and Conforming w/ New Limb Darkening Updates

[tamimfatahi]

• Added testing suite for ld.py
• Modified EXOTIC to handle updated changes of ld.py for standard filters
• If user is using MicroObservatory datasets, MObs CV filter will be used as default
• Organized code

Two things I'd like to fix before making this a PR are the following:

1. I'm currently working on getting standard filters with differing FWHM (ex: CV) to work properly. I should have this done soonish.
2. I don't agree with the logic of the following in ld.py:
   "Clear (unfiltered) reduced to V sequence": "MObs CV"
   It doesn't make sense since not all clear filters are MicroObservatory ones. Maybe we remove this? Although, the description would be nice to keep to describe a non-MObs CV filter on the results page if we could keep it.

Closes #1165

[jpl-jengelke]

Please move tests to the tests directory at the top level of the application. We can explore PyUnit to run them as an add-on later.

[jpl-jengelke]

@rzellem Please comment/approve or add insight to the following ...

I don't agree with the logic of the following in ld.py:
"Clear (unfiltered) reduced to V sequence": "MObs CV"
It doesn't make sense since not all clear filters are MicroObservatory ones. Maybe we remove this? Although, the description would be nice to keep to describe a non-MObs CV filter on the results page if we could keep it.

As background, that is an alias to the MObs CV filter. Obviously we are using MObs CV as a default for clear in most cases. I think maybe @tamimfatahi is objecting to the generic wording being applied to a specific type of clear filter.

As an aside, if CV is entered and the fwhm vals don't match up to those for MObs CV do we still call it Custom with an abbreviation code of N/A? I believe AAVSO requested that all custom filters be tagged with 'N/A'.

@tamimfatahi may have more prescient concerns. Thanks.

[tamimfatahi]

With these changes, the MObs CV filter will no longer be linked to CV. The good news is that users will not have to change anything as we will detect if their images came from MicroObservatory, so it won't matter what they list as their filter (as long as we can tell based on their header).

[jpl-jengelke]

Just as an aside, this is important for the TESS processing because precision is more critical given the nature of space-based telescope observations.

[jpl-jengelke]

I have some ideas and was considering pseudocode right here, but I think we would be more proficient doing it together again tonight. Generally, if we want to preserve user descriptions for certain filter 'name' (e.g. abbreviation) values, I think we should consider that after all the matching, and on very limited bases for the reason mentioned above, wavelengths should generally match filter descriptions.

Bear with me until we can talk about this shortly...

[tamimfatahi]

@jpl-jengelke Updated for the latest addition. EXOTIC will still need to be modified to make this work, but for now, this PR can be approved.

[tamimfatahi]

@jpl-jengelke PR should be good to go for release. Tested it on multiple different runs and outputs as expected. EXOTIC now works with the new additions.