issue_comments

Table actions

3 rows where author_association = "MEMBER" and issue = 578017585 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)

user 3

issue 1

  • Exposing Zarr backend internals as semi-public API · 3 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER · 3 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
596699293 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/3851#issuecomment-596699293 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3851 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU5NjY5OTI5Mw== jhamman 2443309 2020-03-09T18:23:41Z 2020-03-13T05:51:19Z MEMBER

Yes, this is one (probable) path. I wanted to document that we were using these private API functions in an effort to highlight their usefulness and to document their off-piste use. 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Exposing Zarr backend internals as semi-public API 578017585
598554437 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/3851#issuecomment-598554437 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3851 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU5ODU1NDQzNw== shoyer 1217238 2020-03-13T05:19:29Z 2020-03-13T05:19:29Z MEMBER

The imports from xarray.backends.zarr all seem pretty reasonable to me. We could make those semi-public if you like. Of course, ideally the way to write netCDF style data would be codified in some third-party convention, not inside xarray.

I don't think it's a good idea to reuse the imports from xarray.core.pycompat or xarray.util.print_versions. I would just fork that code into your project rather than importing it.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Exposing Zarr backend internals as semi-public API 578017585
596632059 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/3851#issuecomment-596632059 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3851 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU5NjYzMjA1OQ== rabernat 1197350 2020-03-09T16:24:35Z 2020-03-09T16:24:35Z MEMBER

Shouldn't this be solved by the entry points refactor of the backends? In the future, I imagine that the zarr backend for xarray will not live in xarray but rather in some third-party package. That package could expose all of these functions as public API. 

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Exposing Zarr backend internals as semi-public API 578017585

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

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]);