html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,performed_via_github_app,issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-237033108,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,237033108,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzNzAzMzEwOA==,950575,2016-08-02T20:28:25Z,2016-08-02T20:28:25Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Done. Not sure why only `AppVeyor` started :confused: 
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-237008322,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,237008322,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzNzAwODMyMg==,950575,2016-08-02T19:02:19Z,2016-08-02T19:02:19Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> Assuming we do add the `filter` method, maybe `filter_by_attrs`?

Makes sense. I will modify this soon.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-236998182,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,236998182,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzNjk5ODE4Mg==,950575,2016-08-02T18:31:43Z,2016-08-02T18:31:43Z,CONTRIBUTOR,">  I do think the name is a mouthful, though :).

I agree that is a mouthful but then again, I was trying to be consistent with the existing versions. However, I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter and I am fine with whatever you decide. Should I renamed then? `filter_attrs`? (Sounds weird though b/c you are not filtering the `attrs`, but the variables based on the `attrs` :expressionless:)
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-236988451,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,236988451,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzNjk4ODQ1MQ==,950575,2016-08-02T18:00:19Z,2016-08-02T18:00:19Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"I fine with whatever you decide but here are my two cents:
- `get_variables_by_attributes` is the same name of this method in `netcd4` and some java `netcdf` libraries. So I'd rather not have a specialized version for attributes than adding it with name with a different name.
- I see the elegance in `s.filter(lambda x: x.attrs['standard_name'] == 'convective_precipitation_flux')` and I like it a lot! But the specialized version for attributes is more compact to write and, at least in my field, filtering by attributes is more common making this version more convenient.

Feel free to close this if you don't think it is worth adding the specialized version. Or let me know if you want to rename it.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-235785719,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,235785719,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzNTc4NTcxOQ==,950575,2016-07-28T02:44:46Z,2016-07-28T02:44:46Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Is there still an interested in this or should I close in light of https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/883?
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-234722229,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,234722229,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIzNDcyMjIyOQ==,950575,2016-07-23T14:53:41Z,2016-07-23T14:53:41Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> Agreed -- this is almost ready. Please add to the API docs (api.rst) and do the docstring fixes.

Not sure if I did this right :grimacing: 
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-225403691,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,225403691,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIyNTQwMzY5MQ==,950575,2016-06-12T01:18:00Z,2016-06-12T01:18:00Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Rebased and ready for another round of reviews :wink: 
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-219097316,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,219097316,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxOTA5NzMxNg==,950575,2016-05-13T16:46:47Z,2016-05-13T17:12:02Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> The appveyor build failure looks unrelated to this change -- something about conda dependencies.

I am experiencing that in other projects. It is actually a bad download of `miniconda`, and powershell makes the error message unusable. Re-starting should fix it. (BTW miniconda is pre-installed on AppVeyor and that download is not needed.)
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-219061348,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,219061348,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxOTA2MTM0OA==,950575,2016-05-13T14:36:01Z,2016-05-13T14:36:01Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"@jhamman and @shoyer if the tests passes this is ready for another round of review. (Let me know if I should squash the previous ones to make it easier to review.)
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-218314843,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,218314843,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxODMxNDg0Mw==,950575,2016-05-10T22:48:53Z,2016-05-10T22:48:53Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"@shoyer this is ready for another round of review.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-217171905,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,217171905,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxNzE3MTkwNQ==,950575,2016-05-05T14:40:09Z,2016-05-10T22:47:52Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> Well, if you guys are mostly excited about using this for coordinate
> variables, another consistent choice would be to return a list of matching
> DataArrays. But if we want to return a Dataset, we should only do data
> variables, because it's weird to lose all the describing coordinates when
> you match, e.g., standard_name=""air_temperature"".

We agree with you and I prefer to return a Dataset.

Right now we always go to netCDF4-python to do this low-level CF interpretation stuff. If we start using `xarray` for that task we should improve xarray, to take advantage of the conventions (CF/SGRID/UGRID), instead of using `xarray` to just find the coords data. (For example: creating the `z` coordinates from non-dimension coordinates and add that to the Dataset coords automatically.)
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-217163055,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,217163055,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxNzE2MzA1NQ==,950575,2016-05-05T14:03:57Z,2016-05-05T14:03:57Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"After discussing with my CF guru (@rsignell-usgs) and the original author of the `get_variables_by_attributes` (@kwilcox) I jumped the fence and I am OK leaving the xarray model pure and filtering only the data variables.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-217132574,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,217132574,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxNzEzMjU3NA==,950575,2016-05-05T11:41:19Z,2016-05-05T11:41:19Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> should this filter both data variables and coordinates or only data variables?

I thought a little bit more about this and now I am on the fence. The pros of filtering only data variables are a nice and clean Dataset object, and overall consistency with the high level xarray model. The cons are that we cannot do the filtering on the coords (obviously), but most of the time that we need to do that we go to a lower level object like `netCDF4.Dataset`. However, it would be nice if both `xarray` and netCDF4 behaved the same way...

I am 51% with filtering both (and the current implementation does that) but I will leave the final decision to you.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/844#issuecomment-217129119,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/844,217129119,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDIxNzEyOTExOQ==,950575,2016-05-05T11:29:01Z,2016-05-05T11:29:01Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> An important design question: should this filter both data variables and coordinates or only data variables? My thought is that it's only worth filtering data variables -- filtering out unmatched coordinates is not very useful.

I understand that returning coordinates without a data variable associated to them seems weird to the high level model of `xarray.Dataset` , but I disagree that it is not very useful. In fact that is the most common operation I do: find coordinates based on `axis`, `formula_terms`, etc and construct common grids for plotting and/or building the `z` coords from non-dimension coords.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,153126324