Pin dask-expr to < 1.10.11 and revert "Add support for running batch on a single lightcurve"

[wilsonbb]

Reverts #420 and pins dask-expr <1.0.11 to address flakiness reported in #434. The plan is to do another PR for the batch single_lc changes in #420 after all of the batch-related flakiness has been addressed.

Note that even with these changes we're still seeing the test_batch_by_band errors referenced in lincc-frameworks/tape#434 consistently on the python 3.11.9 build, but this is still an improvement over the current test failures we've been seeing in #427

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB

[github-actions]

Before [89aa116]	After [49c8c48]	Ratio	Benchmark (Parameter)
33.7±0.2ms	34.2±0.3ms	1.02	benchmarks.time_prune_sync_workflow
33.6±0.3ms	33.2±0.4ms	0.99	benchmarks.time_batch

Click here to view all benchmarks.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 77.77778% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 95.82%. Comparing base (89aa116) to head (95fb692).

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/tape/ensemble.py	77.77%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #433      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.84%   95.82%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          25       25              
  Lines        1781     1771      -10     
==========================================
- Hits         1707     1697      -10     
  Misses         74       74              

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

[dougbrn]

Thank you for looking into this. Did you try playing with the dask version itself at all? Their test suite is failing atm, and I wonder if pinned dask itself to something older would stabilize things

[wilsonbb]

Thank you for looking into this. Did you try playing with the dask version itself at all? Their test suite is failing atm, and I wonder if pinned dask itself to something older would stabilize things

I've messed around a bit, but among the compatible dask versions, I didn't see the error disappear. But probably worth checking again