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/7391#issuecomment-1403869840,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1403869840,IC_kwDOAMm_X85TrVqQ,2448579,2023-01-25T16:17:30Z,2023-01-25T16:17:30Z,MEMBER,Thanks @arongergely !,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1403706989,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1403706989,IC_kwDOAMm_X85Tqt5t,7316393,2023-01-25T14:27:15Z,2023-01-25T14:27:15Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"maybe not. I changed it back so you could squash to exclude the noise.
The test is adjusted accordingly.
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1384325872,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1384325872,IC_kwDOAMm_X85SgyLw,7316393,2023-01-16T16:58:15Z,2023-01-16T16:58:15Z,CONTRIBUTOR,Will you cherry pick?,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1384253560,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1384253560,IC_kwDOAMm_X85Sggh4,7316393,2023-01-16T16:02:52Z,2023-01-16T16:03:02Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> Option 2 seems easier, so I'd suggest we go with that?
Agreed!
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1384168506,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1384168506,IC_kwDOAMm_X85SgLw6,14808389,2023-01-16T14:46:03Z,2023-01-16T14:46:03Z,MEMBER,"I guess this means that we have two options: just assume this does not cause anything else to fail to get this PR to work (but then this PR would be blocked until we fixed every use of the global `keep_attrs` in a separate PR), or we ignore `str`-valued / callable `keep_attrs` for now and merge your initial proposal.
Option 2 seems easier, so I'd suggest we go with that?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1384142858,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1384142858,IC_kwDOAMm_X85SgFgK,7316393,2023-01-16T14:24:23Z,2023-01-16T14:24:23Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Changing the option setters to accept `combine_attrs`-style strings would open room for silent bugs:
Other funcs/operators assume `keep_attrs` to be boolean so an `if keep_attrs` would cause trouble.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1384130795,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1384130795,IC_kwDOAMm_X85SgCjr,7316393,2023-01-16T14:16:27Z,2023-01-16T14:16:56Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Hit a roadblock.
For binary ops the only way to set `keep_attrs` is through the options.
However we can not set `combine_attrs` style strings to it due to strict validation.
So this would lead to an error:
```python
with xr.set_options(keep_attrs=""drop_conflicts""):
ds1 + ds2
```
To cricle around this we _could_ let `keep_attrs` passed in the operator methods so user could do:
```python
ds1.__add__(ds2, keep_attrs=""drop_conflicts"")
```
But this isn't ""nice"".
Or perhaps I missed something?
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1378595020,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1378595020,IC_kwDOAMm_X85SK7DM,14808389,2023-01-11T11:16:02Z,2023-01-11T11:16:02Z,MEMBER,"The missing documentation for this in `apply_ufunc` is definitely an oversight, so PRs very welcome!
> consider this as new feature, not just a bugfix?
I always struggle with classifying changes, but I guess the more we add onto this PR, the more it becomes a new feature.
> implement this for `xarray.Variable` too?
probably. The only reason this is not done yet is because nobody took the time to actually do it. So, once again: PRs very welcome!","{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7391#issuecomment-1378579381,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7391,1378579381,IC_kwDOAMm_X85SK3O1,7316393,2023-01-11T11:03:40Z,2023-01-11T11:03:40Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Thanks for your suggestions @keewis!
> If possible I'd like to change the computation of the `attrs` of the result a bit to allow more than just `bool` values (see below).
I was puzzled initially. We would introduce the `combine_attrs` behaviour of `xarray.merge()` but under `keep_attrs`.
Then I found out [this is already a thing](https://docs.xarray.dev/en/stable/whats-new.html?highlight=combine_attrs#id192) in `apply_ufunc()`.
I like the idea, shouldn't we
- implement this for `xarray.Variable` too?
- consider this as new feature, not just a bugfix? (for describing in `whats-new.rst`)
- describe in the documentation? (also for `apply_ufunc()` - it's not yet described there).
could do all these, let me know
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1503573351