Thank you for your contribution to Astropy! 🌌 This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainers who will review this pull request of some common things to look for.

• Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals?
• Do the proposed changes follow the Astropy coding guidelines?
• Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the Astropy testing guidelines?
• Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the Astropy documentation guidelines?
• Is rebase and/or squash necessary? If so, please provide the author with appropriate instructions. Also see instructions for rebase and squash.
• Did the CI pass? If no, are the failures related? If you need to run daily and weekly cron jobs as part of the PR, please apply the "Extra CI" label. Codestyle issues can be fixed by the bot.
• Is a change log needed? If yes, did the change log check pass? If no, add the "no-changelog-entry-needed" label. If this is a manual backport, use the "skip-changelog-checks" label unless special changelog handling is necessary.
• Is this a big PR that makes a "What's new?" entry worthwhile and if so, is (1) a "what's new" entry included in this PR and (2) the "whatsnew-needed" label applied?
• At the time of adding the milestone, if the milestone set requires a backport to release branch(es), apply the appropriate "backport-X.Y.x" label(s) before merge.

👋 Thank you for your draft pull request! Do you know that you can use [ci skip] or [skip ci] in your commit messages to skip running continuous integration tests until you are ready?

I checked manually that "exotic archs" all have access to at least v1.2.1

sure, but the fact that it only happens with pytest-doctestplus < 1.0 seems to indicate an incompatibility between older pytest-doctestplus and pytest 8.0 (which isn't too suprising: pytest-doctestplus 1.0.0 is still older than pytest 8.0.0)

pytest-doctestplus was released Aug 11, 2023. Not too recent but also not yet 2 years (as per SPEC 0 philosophy). 🤔

@bsipocz , what do you think about requiring pytest-doctestplus>=1.0 before 2 years is up?

I'm not sure I get the line of reasoning here as we just required pytest 8.0.0 yesterday, and it's a single year old.

True... now makes me think if we bumped pytest too soon... but I did like the code simplification. 😱

if it makes you feel better, the code we removed in #17675 was not actually run on a regular basis (which is the premise to #16963), so we're probably better off without it.

I will think about this and get back to you tomorrow in a couple few of days. Feel free to ping me if I forget. Thanks!

@pllim did you get a chance to think about it ? I still believe in this approach.