issue_comments
8 rows where author_association = "MEMBER", issue = 368004737 and user = 226037 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes · 8 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
429626716 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-429626716 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyOTYyNjcxNg== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-14T13:31:46Z | 2018-10-25T21:10:36Z | MEMBER | @shoyer I added the Questions:
1. ~~I failed to reach 100% coverage becasue I didn't find the way to test It looks like we are very close, what do you think? Shall I move to the documentation? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 | |
429668194 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-429668194 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyOTY2ODE5NA== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-14T22:19:27Z | 2018-10-14T22:28:29Z | MEMBER | @shoyer I added a test for dask.distributed and it passes but please check that it is meaningful, as I'm not completely sure what to test. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 | |
429661591 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-429661591 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyOTY2MTU5MQ== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-14T20:54:09Z | 2018-10-14T20:54:09Z | MEMBER | @shoyer I'm ready to integrate more feedback (especially on the documentation), but I removed the Do you usually keep the history of PRs as it is or do you prefer me to rebase? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 | |
429654399 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-429654399 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyOTY1NDM5OQ== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-14T19:23:25Z | 2018-10-14T19:33:19Z | MEMBER | Tests added and passing with 100% coverage. Added minimal documentation. BTW, I did a 0.9.0 beta release of cfgrib and I plan to give the public announcement tomorrow. :) |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 | |
428710896 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-428710896 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyODcxMDg5Ng== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-10T20:02:36Z | 2018-10-10T20:02:36Z | MEMBER | @shoyer thank you very much for the guidance, it is very appreciated! I stared working on the tests, but I've been blocked immediately by something that looks trivial. I cannot get the test class |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 | |
428381697 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-428381697 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyODM4MTY5Nw== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-09T22:59:32Z | 2018-10-09T22:59:32Z | MEMBER | @shoyer BTW what timeframe do you expect for the v0.11 release? And would you consider merging this Pull Request before the release, assuming that we do a cfgrib release with read support declared beta? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 | |
428380374 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-428380374 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyODM4MDM3NA== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-09T22:53:18Z | 2018-10-09T22:53:18Z | MEMBER | The Furthermore I expect dask performance to be abysmal until I implement ecmwf/cfgrib#20. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 | |
428109749 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2476#issuecomment-428109749 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2476 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyODEwOTc0OQ== | alexamici 226037 | 2018-10-09T08:40:18Z | 2018-10-09T08:53:03Z | MEMBER | @shoyer at long last! :) I quickly sync'ed with the new backend API. I did some light testing. Note that I didn't test with dask at all and I'm not using the passed |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add a GRIB backend via ECMWF cfgrib / ecCodes 368004737 |
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