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/7441#issuecomment-1492956264,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7441,1492956264,IC_kwDOAMm_X85Y_LRo,6628425,2023-04-01T12:22:31Z,2023-04-01T12:22:31Z,MEMBER,Thanks for cleaning up the merge error I must have introduced; I agree this should be ready to go.,"{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 1, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1533980729
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7441#issuecomment-1492724527,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7441,1492724527,IC_kwDOAMm_X85Y-Ssv,6628425,2023-03-31T23:41:20Z,2023-03-31T23:41:20Z,MEMBER,Thanks @keewis for fixing this upstream (https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/52220)!,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1533980729
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7441#issuecomment-1465318583,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7441,1465318583,IC_kwDOAMm_X85XVvy3,6628425,2023-03-12T22:37:20Z,2023-03-12T22:37:20Z,MEMBER,"Still mulling this over a bit, but one other thing that occurs to me is that if we go with a `strftime` solution we should be careful (if it exists) to preserve any sub-second information of the Timestamp as well.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1533980729
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7441#issuecomment-1460037064,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7441,1460037064,IC_kwDOAMm_X85XBmXI,6628425,2023-03-08T11:46:04Z,2023-03-08T11:46:04Z,MEMBER,"Hmm I guess I should have run the tests before saying anything.  We could probably work around the `NaT` issue fairly easily, but I forgot about timezones.  The ability to include a colon in the UTC offset, which we expect in the failing test, with `strftime` was only recently added to Python (https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/95983), which makes things a little messier.  I'll think about this a little more.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1533980729
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7441#issuecomment-1459255349,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7441,1459255349,IC_kwDOAMm_X85W-ng1,6628425,2023-03-08T03:08:31Z,2023-03-08T03:08:31Z,MEMBER,Thanks @keewis--great suggestion--I think this should be ready for review now too!,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1533980729
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7441#issuecomment-1397354953,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7441,1397354953,IC_kwDOAMm_X85TSfHJ,6628425,2023-01-19T17:33:16Z,2023-01-19T17:33:16Z,MEMBER,"Issue reported here: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/issues/50867.  Thanks again for noting that @keewis.  I was too narrowly focused on fixing this in xarray.

We may still want to be careful about non-nanosecond-precision `Timestamp` objects leaking into our code for the time being, but that's a different conversation.","{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1533980729
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7441#issuecomment-1397286186,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7441,1397286186,IC_kwDOAMm_X85TSOUq,6628425,2023-01-19T16:45:24Z,2023-01-19T17:16:31Z,MEMBER,"Thanks @keewis.

> I think this is a bug in pandas: pd.Timestamp(""1-01-01 00:00:00"") returns a date in 2001.

I suspect this may be related to the comment [here](https://github.com/pydata/xarray/blob/6c5840e1198707cdcf7dc459f27ea9510eb76388/xarray/coding/times.py#L124-L128).  

> In any case, t.isoformat(sep="" "") should return the year with 4 digits so maybe we should use that instead? (once again, it doesn't, but that I think is also a bug, maybe the same one?)

Though indeed the `isoformat` behavior is definitely a bug and it would be fair to at least expect this kind of roundtrip to hold, but it doesn't:
```
>>> import pandas as pd
>>> pd.Timestamp(str(pd.Timestamp(""0001-01-01"")))
Timestamp('2001-01-01 00:00:00')
```

I can report that to pandas.  It's not necessarily surprising considering that it previously was not possible to write `pd.Timestamp(""0001-01-01"")`.  ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1533980729