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/7799#issuecomment-1530111638,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7799,1530111638,IC_kwDOAMm_X85bM6aW,35968931,2023-05-01T19:30:05Z,2023-05-01T19:30:05Z,MEMBER,"> I was not aware of https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/6894, which is definitely my bad for not searching properley before setting off smile

No worries! :grin:

> It looks like the changes I'm proposing here are probably orthogonal to work in https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/6894 though?

I think generally yes they are, I agree. 

> the goal of this PR is to generalise the existing unit testing to make it a bit easier to run tests with different unit libraries

Any work that helps generalise xarray's support of units beyond specifically just pint is going to be useful!

My main point to draw your attention to is the idea that *eventually*, *one-day*, it would be nice to move all array-library specific testing out of the xarray core repo in favour of an approach similar to that proposed in #6894. 

> I think that testing for unit libraries is a bit less general than the duck array testing stuff, because there's a host of extra information you need to be a unit library compared to a general duck array.

This is also true. Maybe that means for example the base class you are writing here has a long-term future as an optional part of xarray's testing framework in #6894, specifically for use when testing units libraries? Just thinking out loud","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1690019325
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7799#issuecomment-1529775846,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7799,1529775846,IC_kwDOAMm_X85bLobm,35968931,2023-05-01T14:28:24Z,2023-05-01T14:28:24Z,MEMBER,"Hi @dstansby, thanks for taking initiative on this! Supporting other units-aware packages would be awesome.

Are you aware of our efforts around https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/6894? The idea there was to create a general framework for downstream testing of duck-array libraries, including any implementations of units.

I think the ideas you are proposing here are useful and important, but we should probably discuss what we want the end state of duck-array test suites to look like.

cc @keewis","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1690019325