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?

Even though this test fixes the bug that prompted #17359, it does not mean that #17377 can be reverted, because we still need those tests to pass even when interpolating off of stale IERS_Auto predictive values. Setting auto_max_age=None as #17377 does is the expedient approach to prevent the error.

To really test this, do we have to undo the setting added in #17377 ?

@pllim I'm confused about milestoning here: shouldn't this go to 7.0.0 ?

Anything else you wanted to do before undrafting ?

Just added a bit of polish to the test and comment.

To really test this, do we have to undo the setting added in #17377 ?

Nope, this bugfix is tested by the additional test in this PR. The coordinate tests fixed by #17377 still need to be fixed in that fashion, with their purpose to test coordinates code, not IERS code.

shouldn't this go to 7.0.0 ?

Yes, please put this in 7.0 if possible.

I'll enable auto-merge. I don't think 7.0.0 is possible anymore, unless the release team decides to rebranch it from 7.0.x.

Milestone during RC period is confusing for me as well. Not sure where @saimn is going to tag for release if we are not doing RC2.

v7.0.x is the release branch so anything that is backported to it will be in the next release (rc2 or 7.0 final).