DOC: Complete API for white_light

[pllim]

Towards JP-4107

This PR addresses white_light portion of #9793 . Only touch docs so should not need RT.

On main:

• https://jwst-pipeline.readthedocs.io/en/latest/jwst/white_light/index.html

With this patch:

• https://jwst-pipeline--10705.org.readthedocs.build/en/10705/jwst/white_light/index.html

Tasks

• If you have a specific reviewer in mind, tag them.
• add a build milestone, i.e. Build 12.0 (use the latest build if not sure)
• Does this PR change user-facing code / API? (if not, label with no-changelog-entry-needed)
  • write news fragment(s) in changes/: echo "changed something" > changes/<PR#>.<changetype>.rst (see changelog readme for instructions)
    • if your change breaks step-level or public API (as defined in the docs), also add a changes/<PR#>.breaking.rst news fragment
  • update or add relevant tests
  • update relevant docstrings and / or docs/ page
  • start a regression test and include a link to the running job (click here for instructions)
    • Do truth files need to be updated ("okified")?
      • after the reviewer has approved these changes, run okify_regtests to update the truth files
• if a JIRA ticket exists, make sure it is resolved properly

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 87.11%. Comparing base (5024ea1) to head (e3d1000).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #10705   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.11%   87.11%           
=======================================
  Files         374      374           
  Lines       40349    40349           
=======================================
  Hits        35149    35149           
  Misses       5200     5200           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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.

[emolter]

Looks great, but a question about the expected input types.

It's sorta beyond the scope of this PR but at the same time should be fixed, and this was an opportunity to review the documentation.

[pllim]

expected input types

Looks like you are one of the owners of this step. Just tell me what to change and I will change it. 😸

jwst/.github/CODEOWNERS

Line 83 in d626e4c

/jwst/white_light/ @spacetelescope/jwst-pipeline-maintainers @penaguerrero @emolter

[emolter]

Yeah fair enough. I think @melanieclarke will know best though as she implemented TSOMultiSpecModel. I think what is needed is to replace all instances of MultiSpecModel with TSOMultiSpecModel as well as to mention TSOMultiSpecModel in the location in the docs I specified. I don't believe the generic MultiSpecModel is supported anymore but I'm not 100%... can you confirm that Melanie?

[melanieclarke]

Ned is right -- this step only supports TSOMultiSpecModel now. Anywhere it says MultiSpecModel for this step, it should now say TSOMultiSpecModel. Thanks for catching that!

[pllim]

Thanks @emolter and @melanieclarke ! I think I have addressed all comments. Please re-review to make sure I got them right.