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/2174#issuecomment-392397697,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,392397697,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MjM5NzY5Nw==,5635139,2018-05-28T01:43:57Z,2018-05-28T01:43:57Z,MEMBER,"thanks for working through the feedback, as ever, @shoyer ! 
It's like free coding classes","{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 1, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-392366040,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,392366040,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MjM2NjA0MA==,1217238,2018-05-27T20:48:40Z,2018-05-27T20:48:40Z,MEMBER,thanks @maxim-lian !,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-392111566,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,392111566,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MjExMTU2Ng==,1217238,2018-05-25T16:28:52Z,2018-05-25T16:48:15Z,MEMBER,But I think just supporting this for `isel`/`sel`/`reindex` for now would be enough to be valuable. Note that currently it's on Dataset.reindex() but not DataArray.reindex().,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-392103771,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,392103771,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MjEwMzc3MQ==,1217238,2018-05-25T15:59:50Z,2018-05-25T15:59:50Z,MEMBER,"Looking through Dataset/DataArray methods that support `**kwargs`, I think this may be the full list:
- [ ] stack
- [ ] shift
- [ ] roll
- [ ] set_index
- [ ] reorder_levels
- [ ] rolling
- [ ] resample (not yet, we still support old behavior for the first positional arguments with a warning)
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-392083404,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,392083404,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MjA4MzQwNA==,5635139,2018-05-25T14:53:22Z,2018-05-25T14:53:22Z,MEMBER,AppVeyor failure unrelated,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-392056416,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,392056416,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MjA1NjQxNg==,5635139,2018-05-25T13:24:03Z,2018-05-25T13:24:03Z,MEMBER,"`sel`, `isel` & `reindex` are done

`sel_points` etc are deprecated so we can leave those

Any others on the 'first priority' list?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-391957538,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,391957538,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MTk1NzUzOA==,1217238,2018-05-25T06:42:28Z,2018-05-25T06:42:28Z,MEMBER,"> Arg name?

I'd like a convention of matching names to make it clear in docstrings that these are the same thing, e.g.,
- `something_dict`/`**something`, or
- `something`/`**something_kwargs`

Probably the last is best since users will never have cause to type the longer argument name ending with `_kwargs`.

In practice, I suspect these first arguments are almost always going to be used positionally. We might even imagine making them positional only argument if [PEP 570](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0570/) is ever accepted. So I don't think it matters too much.

> Combine or raise if supplied with kwargs?

Let's raise (like your current implementation) if both are provided. Combining could be error prone and seems unnecessarily complicated.

This is the same logic I implemented in the somewhat misleadingly named `utils.combine_pos_and_kw_args()` utility function (used by `Dataset.reindex()`).

> Is there an encapsulation leak? Should we have a user API layer which is then translated to a more robust representation (i.e. kwargs to a dict), and those be separate methods? My initial inclination is that the current approach is good and managable

I agree -- I think the current version is manageable.

For internal use, we should always use the positional argument, but there's not much harm in leaving `**kwargs` around.","{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-391954557,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,391954557,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MTk1NDU1Nw==,5635139,2018-05-25T06:25:18Z,2018-05-25T06:25:18Z,MEMBER,@shoyer I see you're online - let me know if you have any thoughts re the changes. Am on a burst of open-source work atm,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-391638302,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,391638302,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MTYzODMwMg==,5635139,2018-05-24T08:47:46Z,2018-05-24T08:47:46Z,MEMBER,"> `DataArray.__getitem__` is only meant as a convenient short-cut for getting coordinates, which we might even want to deprecate entirely

👍 ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2174#issuecomment-391637781,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2174,391637781,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM5MTYzNzc4MQ==,5635139,2018-05-24T08:45:59Z,2018-05-24T08:45:59Z,MEMBER,"I added an initial attempt at allowing for supplying a dict; on `isel` only at first

Let me know ppl's thoughts:
- Arg name?
- Combine or raise if supplied with kwargs?
- Is there an encapsulation leak? Should we have a user API layer which is then translated to a more robust representation (i.e. kwargs to a dict), and those be separate methods? My initial inclination is that the current approach is good and managable","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,325609580