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/4409#issuecomment-695036123,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,695036123,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5NTAzNjEyMw==,14808389,2020-09-18T19:03:33Z,2020-09-18T19:03:49Z,MEMBER,should we merge this before releasing 0.16.1?,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691455578,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691455578,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTQ1NTU3OA==,14808389,2020-09-12T09:32:48Z,2020-09-14T11:47:03Z,MEMBER,"@kmuehlbauer, I modified `concat` so #4072 and #2811 might already be fixed. Can you confirm?

Edit: at least #4072 does not seem to be fixed yet. ~Good news is that this doesn't seem to depend on a `set` (i.e. the result does not change with different interpreter sessions)~","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691864317,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691864317,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTg2NDMxNw==,14808389,2020-09-14T07:10:08Z,2020-09-14T07:10:08Z,MEMBER,thanks for checking!,"{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691298627,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691298627,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTI5ODYyNw==,14808389,2020-09-11T20:31:31Z,2020-09-11T20:31:31Z,MEMBER,the tests pass so this should be ready for review,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691245402,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691245402,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTI0NTQwMg==,14808389,2020-09-11T18:23:09Z,2020-09-11T18:23:09Z,MEMBER,"""mix up"" in this case means that the order is random (i.e. a `set` was involved). Sorry if that was unclear.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691242257,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691242257,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTI0MjI1Nw==,14808389,2020-09-11T18:16:05Z,2020-09-11T18:16:05Z,MEMBER,"thanks, that almost fixed the doctests. However, `concat` seems to somehow also mix up the coordinates / dimensions. I tried to fix that by not iterating over a set, but I'm totally not sure if there's a better fix.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691208282,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691208282,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTIwODI4Mg==,14808389,2020-09-11T17:00:07Z,2020-09-11T17:00:07Z,MEMBER,"unfortunately, that's pretty difficult: the set in question is `Dataset._coord_names`, and there would be a lot to rewrite if we tried to change that to a list. Just for reference, the method where the reordering happens is `Dataset._copy_listed`.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691157835,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691157835,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTE1NzgzNQ==,14808389,2020-09-11T15:19:40Z,2020-09-11T15:21:56Z,MEMBER,"yes, sorry, you're right, that is indeed non-deterministic, and exactly the problem I'm having with the doctests.

Interestingly, this seems to be deterministic per python session: running
```python
import xarray as xr


ds = xr.Dataset(
    {""a"": ((""x"", ""y""), [[0, 1], [2, 3]])}, coords={""x"": [""a"", ""b""], ""y"": [0, 1]}
)
print(ds)
print(ds + 1)
print(ds)
print(ds + 1)
```
will print the same result for `ds` and `ds + 1`, but when rerunning in a new session, the coordinate order may be changed (more coordinates increase the probability for the change).","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691136159,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691136159,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTEzNjE1OQ==,14808389,2020-09-11T14:41:39Z,2020-09-11T14:44:03Z,MEMBER,"I think that's still deterministic (although I agree that the change in the title is annoying): if you run your script multiple times, it will always return the same output. The issue I'm trying to fix here is much worse: the output of the *same* code will return *different* results with each run.

Edit: but maybe I just have a messed up environment","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-691037092,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,691037092,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5MTAzNzA5Mg==,14808389,2020-09-11T11:23:26Z,2020-09-11T14:28:41Z,MEMBER,"> Can you give an example of a non-deterministic coordinate order

sure, just try running `python -m pytest --doctest-modules xarray --ignore xarray/tests`. For me at least (with the environment created by `py38.yml`), `xarray.core.common.DataWithCoords.pipe`, `xarray.core.groupby.GroupBy.quantile` and `xarray.core.dataset.Dataset.filter_by_attrs` pass or fail at random: in one run they pass, in the next they fail because a different ordering was used for the coordinates (see also #4408).

> I think users find it a little more intuitive to preserve the order of dict keys.

Not sure if that's evidence against this (maybe we need to rearrange the `repr` to really fix it), but in #4072 someone confused the order of the printed coordinates with the order of the dimensions. I'd think it's much easier to tell people that these are alphabetically sorted, no matter what they do, so they shouldn't try to read the dimension order from the coordinates (same with the dimension summary).","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4409#issuecomment-687919197,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4409,687919197,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY4NzkxOTE5Nw==,14808389,2020-09-06T22:27:50Z,2020-09-06T23:02:50Z,MEMBER,"thanks for the hint, sorting in `__init__` should be possible and might even be easier than sorting when formatting. However, `3.7` is the first version of python (the language) which includes the insertion-order preservation introduced in CPython `3.6`. Do we have to bump the supported python version for that, or is it fine to keep the current behavior for a non-CPython `python<3.7` (if we ever supported a language other than CPython)?

Edit: that breaks two of the `iris` tests, which seem to depend on the order of the coords. Maybe we should change that?","{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,694448177