FIX: explicitely check for "False" in get_crs()

[kmuehlbauer]

• Changes are documented in history.md

Currently this will always return AEQD crs instead of the one in crs_wkt since the current check just checks for True. It fails since crs_wkt is a variable with value 0.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #142 (f5a2906) into main (5570e22) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head f5a2906 differs from pull request most recent head d4dbd22. Consider uploading reports for the commit d4dbd22 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #142      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.33%   88.32%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          20       20              
  Lines        3439     3436       -3     
==========================================
- Hits         3038     3035       -3     
  Misses        401      401              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	88.32% <100.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
xradar/georeference/projection.py	83.33% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[kmuehlbauer]

@mgrover1 This one bit me over at wradlib today. Somehow my current check always uses the AEQD 😬 I'm going to merge this on Thursday latest and will do another bug-fix release (0.4.2) if no-one beats me to it.