{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RiceMunk/omnifit/issues/23","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RiceMunk/omnifit/issues/23/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RiceMunk/omnifit/issues/23/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RiceMunk/omnifit/issues/23/events","html_url":"https://github.com/RiceMunk/omnifit/issues/23","id":122117471,"number":23,"title":"Use astropy.modeling for fitting instead of lmfit?","user":{"login":"RiceMunk","id":401690,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/401690?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk","html_url":"https://github.com/RiceMunk","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/RiceMunk/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RiceMunk/omnifit/labels/enhancement","name":"enhancement","color":"84b6eb"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2015-12-14T19:53:21Z","updated_at":"2015-12-14T19:53:21Z","closed_at":null,"body":"As recommended by the astropy folks and since it would be nice to reduce the number of dependencies, it might be a good idea to use astropy.modeling instead of lmfit as the fitting engine for omnifit.\r\n\r\nTo make me not forget to check whether or not this suits what omnifit needs to do, I'm creating this issue here to keep reminding me."}}