Codecov Report

Merging #2484 (9799890) into main (b1fcfff) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2484      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   62.92%   62.90%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         133      133              
  Lines       17302    17308       +6     
==========================================
  Hits        10888    10888              
- Misses       6414     6420       +6     

📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more

Getting rid of these prints has come up before, thanks for doing the cleanup. One holdup is to decide whether to go with verbose and prints, or put everything in the logger. Currently, we're a mishmash and I would prefer to reach a decision and use that going forward (see #1110 and related open PRs).

I recall @andamian put some very good arguments for the logger approach, but maybe the verbose is a good enough approach for the simple modules like astrometry_net?
Any strong opinions? @keflavich, @pllim or @mwcraig?

Logger is good for pipeline but can be troublesome if astroquery is used as "middleware" where the downstream packages also have their own loggers and find it hard to control yours. Also, it can clutter up notebooks if not set properly for that use case. So, it really depends on how you want it to be used and where.

I like @pllim's point here - if we get included in pipelines, and we've seen cases of that happening, we don't want to spam when different modes are activated. I'd therefore lean toward if verbose

But I can be sold either way.

I think the verbose approach is fine here.

Thanks @astrofrog!