issue_comments
19 rows where author_association = "CONTRIBUTOR", issue = 424265093 and user = 22566757 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- Read grid mapping and bounds as coords · 19 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
778717611 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-778717611 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc3ODcxNzYxMQ== | DWesl 22566757 | 2021-02-14T03:35:55Z | 2021-02-14T03:35:55Z | CONTRIBUTOR |
It seems you've already figured this out, but for anyone else with this question, the repeat of the call on that file is part of the warning that the file does not have all the variables the attributes refer to. You can fix this by recreating the file with the listed variables added ( |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
778629061 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-778629061 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc3ODYyOTA2MQ== | DWesl 22566757 | 2021-02-13T14:46:25Z | 2021-02-13T14:46:25Z | CONTRIBUTOR | I think this looks good. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
761842344 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-761842344 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc2MTg0MjM0NA== | DWesl 22566757 | 2021-01-17T16:48:39Z | 2021-01-17T16:48:39Z | CONTRIBUTOR | Looks good to me. I was wondering where those docstrings were. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
670996109 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-670996109 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY3MDk5NjEwOQ== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-08-09T02:17:07Z | 2020-08-09T16:36:12Z | CONTRIBUTOR | That's two people with that view so I made the change. Again, I feel that the quality flags are essentially meaningless on their own, useful primarily in the context of their associated variables, like the items currently put in the XArray On a related note, I should probably check whether this breaks conversion to an |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
670816691 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-670816691 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY3MDgxNjY5MQ== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-08-08T03:25:17Z | 2020-08-08T03:53:39Z | CONTRIBUTOR | You are correct; My personal view is that the quality information should stay with the variable it describes unless explicitly dropped; I think your view is that quality information can always be extracted from the original dataset, and that no variable should carry quality information for a different variable. At this point it would be simple to remove I should point out that a similar situation arises for |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
670765806 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-670765806 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY3MDc2NTgwNg== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-08-07T22:29:20Z | 2020-08-07T22:29:20Z | CONTRIBUTOR | The MinimumVersionsPolicy error appears to be a series of internal |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
670730008 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-670730008 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY3MDczMDAwOA== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-08-07T22:02:47Z | 2020-08-07T22:02:47Z | CONTRIBUTOR | pydata/xarray-data#19 |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
667744209 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-667744209 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2Nzc0NDIwOQ== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-08-03T00:14:24Z | 2020-08-03T19:42:02Z | CONTRIBUTOR | The Another option is to just delete the |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
667737160 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-667737160 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2NzczNzE2MA== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-08-02T23:13:26Z | 2020-08-02T23:13:26Z | CONTRIBUTOR | The example the doc build doesn't like: ```python ds = xr.tutorial.load_dataset("rasm") ds.to_zarr("rasm.zarr", mode="w") import zarr zgroup = zarr.open("rasm.zarr")
print(zgroup.tree())
dict(zgroup["Tair"].attrs)
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
497948836 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-497948836 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5Nzk0ODgzNg== | DWesl 22566757 | 2019-06-01T14:20:08Z | 2020-07-14T15:55:17Z | CONTRIBUTOR | On 5/31/2019 11:50 AM, dcherian wrote:
At present, the proper, CF-compliant way to do this is to have both |grid_mapping| and |bounds| variables in |data_vars|, and maintain the attributes yourself, including making sure the variables get copied into the result after relevant |ds[var_name]| and |ds.sel(axis=bounds)| operations. If you decide to move these variables to |coords|, the |bounds| variables will still get dropped on any subsetting operation, including those where the relevant axis was retained, the |grid_mapping| variables will be included in the result of all subsetting operations (including pulling out, for example, a time coordinate), and both will be included in some |coordinates| attribute when written to disk, breaking CF compliance. This PR only really addresses getting these variables in |coords| initially and keeping them out of the global |coordinates| attribute when writing to disk.
You have a point about |grid_mapping|, but applying the MetPy approach of saving the information in another, more directly useful format (|cartopy.Projection| instances) immediately after loading the file would be a way around that. For |bounds|, I think |pd.PeriodIndex| would be the most natural representation for time, and |pd.IntervalIndex| for most other 1-D cases, but that still leaves |bounds| for two-or-more-dimensional coordinates. That's a design choice I'll leave to the maintainers.
At present, |set(ds[var_name].attrs["coordinates"].split())| and |set(ds[var_name].coords) - set(ds[var_name].indexes[dim_name])| would be identical, since the |coordinates| attribute is essentially computed from the second expression on write. Do you have a use case in mind where you need specifically the list of CF auxiliary coordinates, or is that just an example of something that would change under the new proposal? I assume |units| would be moved to |encoding| only for |datetime64[ns]| and |timedelta64[ns]| variables. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
644405067 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-644405067 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY0NDQwNTA2Nw== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-06-15T21:40:49Z | 2020-06-15T21:40:49Z | CONTRIBUTOR | This PR currently puts |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
633253434 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-633253434 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDYzMzI1MzQzNA== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-05-24T16:09:04Z | 2020-05-24T16:09:04Z | CONTRIBUTOR | Should I change this to put |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
597375929 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-597375929 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU5NzM3NTkyOQ== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-03-10T23:54:41Z | 2020-03-10T23:54:41Z | CONTRIBUTOR | I think the choice is between If it helps lean your decision one way or the other, |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
587466093 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-587466093 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU4NzQ2NjA5Mw== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-02-18T13:43:12Z | 2020-02-18T13:43:12Z | CONTRIBUTOR | The test failures seem to all be due to recent changes in Is sticking the |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
586273656 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-586273656 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU4NjI3MzY1Ng== | DWesl 22566757 | 2020-02-14T12:47:06Z | 2020-02-14T12:47:06Z | CONTRIBUTOR | I just noticed pandas.PeriodIndex would be an alternative to pandas.IntervalIndex for time data if which side the interval is closed on is largely irrelevant for such data. Is there an interest in using these for 1D coordinates with bounds? I think |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
497566742 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-497566742 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NzU2Njc0Mg== | DWesl 22566757 | 2019-05-31T04:00:17Z | 2019-05-31T04:00:17Z | CONTRIBUTOR | Switched to use Re: If so, would it be sufficient to change their |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
497558317 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-497558317 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NzU1ODMxNw== | DWesl 22566757 | 2019-05-31T03:04:06Z | 2019-05-31T03:13:53Z | CONTRIBUTOR | This is briefly mentioned above, in
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#discussion_r270595609
The rationale was that everywhere else xarray uses CF attributes for something, the original values of those attributes are recorded in If you feel strongly to the contrary, there's an idea at the top of this thread for getting For |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
478290053 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-478290053 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ3ODI5MDA1Mw== | DWesl 22566757 | 2019-03-30T21:17:17Z | 2019-03-30T21:17:17Z | CONTRIBUTOR | I can shift this to use encoding only, but I'm having trouble figuring out where that code would go. Would the preferred path be to create VariableCoder classes for each and add them to encode_cf_variable, then add tests to xarray.tests.test_coding? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 | |
476586154 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2844#issuecomment-476586154 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2844 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ3NjU4NjE1NA== | DWesl 22566757 | 2019-03-26T11:31:05Z | 2019-03-26T11:31:05Z | CONTRIBUTOR | Related to #1475 and #2288 , but this is just keeping the metadata consistent where already present, not extending the data model to include bounds, cells, or projections. I should add a test to ensure saving still works if the bounds are lost when pulling out variables. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Read grid mapping and bounds as coords 424265093 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] ( [html_url] TEXT, [issue_url] TEXT, [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT, [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id]) ); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue] ON [issue_comments] ([issue]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user] ON [issue_comments] ([user]);
user 1