Lock file maintenance

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Update	Change
lockFileMaintenance	All locks refreshed

🔧 This Pull Request updates lock files to use the latest dependency versions.

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 4am on monday" (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR is behind base branch, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

👻 Immortal: This PR will be recreated if closed unmerged. Get config help if that's undesired.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR was generated by Mend Renovate. View the repository job log.

[renovate]

Edited/Blocked Notification

Renovate will not automatically rebase this PR, because it does not recognize the last commit author and assumes somebody else may have edited the PR.

You can manually request rebase by checking the rebase/retry box above.

⚠️ Warning: custom changes will be lost.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.04%. Comparing base (fa22fd0) to head (7ba8c48).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1899   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.04%   99.04%           
=======================================
  Files         306      306           
  Lines       11590    11593    +3     
=======================================
+ Hits        11479    11482    +3     
  Misses        111      111           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[rtuck99]

@Relm-Arrowny I have made a change to apple2_undulator such that the wait=False on the sets are no longer present, however if left as is the await asyncio.gather() would wait for them to complete.

As presumably this is not what was intended, I have merged the subsequent wait_for_value() into the same gather() operation. Please can you check and see if this is indeed what you intended

[Relm-Arrowny]

@Relm-Arrowny I have made a change to apple2_undulator such that the wait=False on the sets are no longer present, however if left as is the await asyncio.gather() would wait for them to complete.

As presumably this is not what was intended, I have merged the subsequent wait_for_value() into the same gather() operation. Please can you check and see if this is indeed what you intended

Do we have to change it, I do not remember if it has to be wait = False or not I am 50% sure it has to as setting it to False is an active choose as the default is Ture.
If we have to change it i can try testing this change when hardware is avaiable.

[DominicOram]

Thanks, I will make the first suggested change and happy to do the 2nd if @Relm-Arrowny agrees.

[DominicOram]

Should: As discussed, I think we could change the signal to be wait=False

[DominicOram]

Do we have to change it, I do not remember if it has to be wait = False or not I am 50% sure it has to as setting it to False is an active choose as the default is Ture.
If we have to change it i can try testing this change when hardware is avaiable.

Should: @Relm-Arrowny We need to change it so that we can use the latest ophyd-async (https://github.com/bluesky/ophyd-async/releases/tag/v0.15). I don't see why you would need to not wait here when there are other bits of the code where you are waiting and if you're not sure either way can I suggest we:

• Change it to wait=True
• Make a new issue to test ASAP - I am happy to come down to the beamline and help with this too, if there is weird EPICS behaviour we can probably also ask @coretl

If we can definitely do this test next week then maybe we can wait until then to merge but we're now 2 ophyd-async versions behind so I would like to move ASAP.