CC @NicolasHug

The time has come to just treat single backticks as double backticks.

Not doing the X and y?

Adding term to X and y seems a little less readable.

hmm, ok, I don't mind it much either way. LGTM once the conflict is resolved.

I'm fine with it.

From: #24104 (comment), @thomasjpfan do you think it would be useful to add a bit in our documentation about single back ticks rendering as code blocks? (Edit: though not sure if there is consensus on what we want people to use...)
Also, I saw #14665 and although it has been a while, would it be useful to document that there was a change from the custom_references_resolver to explicit links (though maybe it is so old there is no point in telling people that it changed?)

do you think it would be useful to add a bit in our documentation about single back ticks rendering as code blocks?

I think most new docstring are single backticks these days. I think it's worth documenting because it is something specific to our sphinx configuration.

As for custom_references_resolver, I do not think we need to document it because we have not been using any as the default_role for a few years now. Also, I do not think custom_references_resolver.py is being used at all and can be removed.