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/4248#issuecomment-669616000,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4248,669616000,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2OTYxNjAwMA==,14808389,2020-08-06T00:37:41Z,2020-08-06T00:37:41Z,MEMBER,should be ready for review again,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,663825726
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4248#issuecomment-669597198,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4248,669597198,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2OTU5NzE5OA==,14808389,2020-08-05T23:31:19Z,2020-08-05T23:31:19Z,MEMBER,"I put it into internals for now, together with a small paragraph about the requirements on duck arrays, but this should definitely be extended and moved somewhere more visible – maybe a `Extending xarray` document, together with the current section about custom accessors?

I also added a test, but it feels a bit strange to compare the result with the return value of a direct call to the object's `_repr_inline_`.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,663825726
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4248#issuecomment-669576665,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4248,669576665,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2OTU3NjY2NQ==,14808389,2020-08-05T22:47:13Z,2020-08-05T22:47:13Z,MEMBER,"tests are a good point, and I guess this should also be documented somewhere. Any ideas where that could be? Internals?","{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,663825726
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4248#issuecomment-669564552,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4248,669564552,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2OTU2NDU1Mg==,14808389,2020-08-05T22:39:42Z,2020-08-05T22:39:42Z,MEMBER,"if I remember correctly, this was accepted in this week's community meeting. Should this be merged, then?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,663825726
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4248#issuecomment-669289892,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4248,669289892,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2OTI4OTg5Mg==,14808389,2020-08-05T16:17:55Z,2020-08-05T16:17:55Z,MEMBER,"> I think `_repr_*_` is the standard from IPython/Jupyter

exactly, that's where the name came from.

Also, if consistency with the functions in `xarray.core.formatting` is important it might be better to choose `_repr_inline_`: the `short_*_repr` functions simply shorten the normal `repr`.","{""total_count"": 2, ""+1"": 2, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,663825726