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/2571#issuecomment-447687361,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2571,447687361,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0NzY4NzM2MQ==,10050469,2018-12-16T23:40:32Z,2018-12-16T23:40:32Z,MEMBER,"> +1 for putting this in ""Breaking changes"" 

Sorry for being so slow. I just done it, will merge tomorrow once the tests pass.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,384004189
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2571#issuecomment-446661848,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2571,446661848,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0NjY2MTg0OA==,1217238,2018-12-12T16:58:11Z,2018-12-12T16:58:11Z,MEMBER,"+1 for putting this in ""Breaking changes"" (we try to be pretty conservative with the definition of a strict ""Enhancement""), but otherwise this looks good to me.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,384004189
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2571#issuecomment-443474646,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2571,443474646,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0MzQ3NDY0Ng==,6628425,2018-12-02T02:10:22Z,2018-12-02T02:10:22Z,MEMBER,"> It must also be noted that this might break some code in downstream libraries (including mine) which has built workarounds for this and will now error because the bounds are already decoded. Here also, I'm quite confident that this is an edge case but its worth mentioning. Should I put my what's new in ""Breaking changes"" instead?

I for sure see this perspective.  I also think a plausible case could be made that this change is like a ""bug fix,"" that is something that people may have needed to work around before in various ways, but ultimately should not have needed to.  So I think it's up to you what you think is best.  

If you do decide to shift it to the breaking changes section, I would suggest being a little more specific about under what circumstances the behavior is changing (i.e. this only impacts the behavior for time bounds variables defined via CF conventions that do not already have ""units"" and ""calendar"" attributes).","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,384004189
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2571#issuecomment-443420763,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2571,443420763,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0MzQyMDc2Mw==,10050469,2018-12-01T11:51:50Z,2018-12-01T11:51:50Z,MEMBER,"Thanks! Made the change as requested. Regarding the general design:

> With this implementation, if one decodes the times, and then saves things back out to a file, a ""time bounds"" variable will contain units and calendar attributes even though it might not have them initially. I'm not sure if this is a big deal (in this case it is simply adding redundant metadata), but I just wanted to bring it up in case it was a concern.

I agree - I don't think it is a big deal either. It must also be noted that this might break some code in downstream libraries (including mine) which has built workarounds for this and will now error because the bounds are already decoded. Here also, I'm quite confident that this is an edge case but its worth mentioning. Should I put my what's new in ""Breaking changes"" instead?
","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,384004189
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2571#issuecomment-443026008,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2571,443026008,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0MzAyNjAwOA==,10050469,2018-11-29T23:00:10Z,2018-12-01T11:45:09Z,MEMBER,"I addressed all comments except the fixtures, which seemed a bit overkill (but I simplified the tests). Thanks!","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,384004189
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2571#issuecomment-441412776,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2571,441412776,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0MTQxMjc3Ng==,1217238,2018-11-25T03:34:46Z,2018-11-25T03:34:46Z,MEMBER,Could we move this logic into a separate helper function? That would make things a little better organized and easier to test.,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,384004189
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2571#issuecomment-441380545,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2571,441380545,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0MTM4MDU0NQ==,24736507,2018-11-24T16:50:15Z,2018-11-24T16:50:15Z,NONE,"Hello @fmaussion! Thanks for submitting the PR.

 - There are no PEP8 issues in the file [`xarray/conventions.py`](https://github.com/fmaussion/xarray/blob/b0c3dcf378d955dfccc1fc974510c93ef1e71543/xarray/conventions.py) !

 - There are no PEP8 issues in the file [`xarray/tests/test_coding_times.py`](https://github.com/fmaussion/xarray/blob/b0c3dcf378d955dfccc1fc974510c93ef1e71543/xarray/tests/test_coding_times.py) !

","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,384004189