DSA-110 FRB photometry from Sharma et al (2024)

[caseyjlaw]

The missing values are negative, but not exactly the same as used by others.
Let me know what you think.

[caseyjlaw]

Anything I can do to advance this? My plan was to get this merged and then work on the hosts.

[profxj]

Thanks for this, @caseyjlaw !

Any chance you can make the bad values -999. instead of a range of negative values?

[profxj]

oh, and the filters will need to match the schema described in here:

https://github.com/FRBs/FRB/blob/main/frb/galaxies/defs.py

and the magnitudes are assumed to not have been corrected for Galactic extinction.
The code will do that for you. Thanks!

[caseyjlaw]

I've modified the csv (and added a def) according to your suggestion. Do the CI tests cover validation of csv files or should I test another way?

[profxj]

Well, the next steps are to generate JSON files for the hosts which is probably
easiest for me to do.

But, it would be easier on me if this were a branch in the Repo (instead of grabbing your fork).

So, I suggest we redirect this PR into a branch
and then work on that branch together.

Good by you, @caseyjlaw ?

[profxj]

I should add, the JSON files are auto-generated, e.g.

frb_build Hosts --frb TNS

but there is a fair bit of public data downloading that goes on
which requires additional packages, etc.

[caseyjlaw]

Merging via a branch is fine by me. This PR is going from a new branch on my fork to a new branch on the main repo. We could just approve and merge into that new branch, then merge again into main after doing the work you suggested.

[profxj]

Ah, I had missed that! :)

Am approving and merging now. and we can issue a new PR from
that branch eventually.

[caseyjlaw]

Ok, just let me know how I can help.