home / github

Menu
  • Search all tables
  • GraphQL API

issue_comments

Table actions
  • GraphQL API for issue_comments

2 rows where issue = 1519552711 and user = 4160723 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 1

  • benbovy · 2 ✖

issue 1

  • Import datatree in xarray? · 2 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER 2
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
1372908509 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7418#issuecomment-1372908509 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7418 IC_kwDOAMm_X85R1Ovd benbovy 4160723 2023-01-05T23:08:15Z 2023-01-05T23:08:15Z MEMBER

Again, there is likely more good reasons merging the Datatree code with Xarray than not doing it, but IMHO such decision should be made very carefully. You certainly do know better than me what positive vs. negative impacts it would have here! I'm just speaking generally from my experience of having struggled while doing some heavy refactoring in Xarray recently :)

{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  Import datatree in xarray? 1519552711
1372888139 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7418#issuecomment-1372888139 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7418 IC_kwDOAMm_X85R1JxL benbovy 4160723 2023-01-05T22:46:05Z 2023-01-05T22:46:05Z MEMBER

I don't have strong opinions for or against including datatree in Xarray. It indeed makes sense if it is using many Xarray internals and if there are many existing or potential applications for it. Additional load (CI) is fine if datatree doesn't bring any extra dependency and won't do so in the near future (which seems to be the case).

Datatree should become a first-class Xarray object

Since Datatree sits above DataArray and Dataset, it should not interfere with any of our existing API.

Would it mean that if someone wants to later add any feature "x" or "y" into Xarray, they just need implementing the feature for Dataset (and possibly DataArray) and it will be guaranteed to work with Datatree? (I guess so but I'm not familiar enough with Datatree to know it for sure).

Otherwise, if there is any extra implementation effort required to make feature "x" or "y" work with Datatree, then I'm concerned about the additional burden or obstacle for future contributors and maintainers. Or we could say that this is OK to leave datatree support and wait for someone to take care of it later, but I don't think it is ideal to have such non-synchronized state within Xarray itself.

{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  Import datatree in xarray? 1519552711

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]);
Powered by Datasette · Queries took 33.181ms · About: xarray-datasette