This PR is ready for review!

Thanks for the feedback and yes it is indeed not a pytest test so I decided to name it like the suggestion, please do tell me if it is alright now or if I need to come up with a better name

My reading of the issue is that we should remove this file, and the other two examples with "test" in the filename. But before removing them, we should check if they are actually testing anything that is not covered by our unit tests, and if so adapt them into unit tests.

is that we should remove this file

I really don't think we should remove this file b/c it's probably the cleanest example of writing a custom unit (data type) convertor.

I think maybe all the other units examples use basic_units.py, which is a toy units library, to demo the units functionality rather than show how to write units.

it's probably the cleanest example of writing a custom unit (data type) convertor.

Agreed, the code is somewhat simpler than basic_units.py, but that's a very low bar. Frankly, from reading the text I only get a very vague idea on what the example may be about and that does not include "writing a custom unit (data type) convertor." There's a lot of implied knowledge. Title and text would need a complete overhaul. I may also a good idea to turn this more into a tutorial.

Should we change it into a tutorial then? If so how exactly would that work? Or maybe we should keep it as it is and just add a few comments just for clarification?

@livlutz by tutorial, it would be breaking up that example into sections and explaining each piece - this piece is writing a custom unit, this piece is writing a custom convertor, this is how it's put together, which makes it so you can write the plotting commands at the bottom.

But also, I think next steps here might have to be taken by someone who understands the somewhat niche topic of our unit conversion system. If you'd like to work on an example, I think #30026 might be more accessible. Just tag me and I'll review it.

This could still be renamed and retitled - both would be an improvement over "Evan's Test" (no disrespect to whoever Evan is) even if the example should be fixed or moved

oh no I am sorry for the last commits, I started to work on the issue @story645 suggested and I think it all ended up here, I'm looking for a way to reverse it...or maybe someone could take a look at both changes or maybe help me out with this

I'm looking for a way to reverse it

There's probably a more streamlined way to do this but this is I think the most straightforward:

git checkout upstream main
git checkout -B histogram_colorgram
git cherry-pick c81072f5c296f303f02164b84db72032c14f9f7f
git push

What's happening in the above is you're making a new feature branch off main for the histogram colormap and then moving just the commit making that example to the histogram_colormap branch.

Then you can checkout this branch again and push. You may need to also drop this commit from this branch, which then means

git checkout main
git rebase -i upstream main

and depending on your code editor you'll see an option to drop this commit.

Also, strongly urge you to read our contributor guide, particularly on:

• making and managing feature branches: https://matplotlib.org/devdocs/devel/development_workflow.html#make-a-new-feature-branch
• rebasing: https://matplotlib.org/devdocs/devel/development_workflow.html#manage-commit-history

thanks a lot, I already found a way to do it btw if I want to open a PR to the other issue should I just do it from the other branch or should I wait until this PR is finished?

should I just do it from the other branch or should I wait until this PR is finished?

Just go for it