home / github

Menu
  • Search all tables
  • GraphQL API

issue_comments

Table actions
  • GraphQL API for issue_comments

4 rows where issue = 290593053 and user = 1197350 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 1

  • rabernat · 4 ✖

issue 1

  • xarray contrib module · 4 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER 4
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
483370793 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1850#issuecomment-483370793 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1850 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ4MzM3MDc5Mw== rabernat 1197350 2019-04-15T18:43:45Z 2019-04-15T18:43:45Z MEMBER

@nbren12 - the key difference for our micro-packages is that the primary maintainer is me, not my grad students, and I'm not going anywhere for now. 😉

I still agree that there is probably a better way to organize all of this. Just trying to share our perspective as an xarray-centric small research group.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  xarray contrib module 290593053
483348884 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1850#issuecomment-483348884 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1850 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ4MzM0ODg4NA== rabernat 1197350 2019-04-15T17:40:07Z 2019-04-15T17:40:07Z MEMBER

The approach we have been taking is to develop "micro-packages". We currently have three: - xgcm - for finite volume cell operations on top of xarray DataArrays - xrft - for coordinate-aware Fourier transforms of Xarray DataArrays - xhistogram - (this one is brand new) - for multidimensional histograms applied along specified axes

These packages share some common design principles. In particular, they are all fully lazy and dask-friendly, meaning that we can apply them to very large datasets (which is the main focus in our group). By keeping the packages small, they are more maintainable. Xgcm and Xrft probably have O(3) active contributors, primarily myself and grad students in my group. Small, but significantly different from 1. We use these packages heavily in everyday scientific work, so I know they are useful.

I would love to combine forces on a larger effort. However, we have limited time and effort. For now, however, this situation doesn't seem too bad. It's kind of compatible with what @teoliphant was suggesting in his comment 1 above. I'm not sure that some mega xarray-contrib package would have critical mass to be sustainable either.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  xarray contrib module 290593053
480100748 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1850#issuecomment-480100748 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1850 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ4MDEwMDc0OA== rabernat 1197350 2019-04-04T23:40:12Z 2019-04-04T23:40:12Z MEMBER

Just to add to the mix, we have our own package for spectra! https://xrft.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

On Apr 4, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Noah D Brenowitz notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks @rabernat that awesome list looks pretty awesome.

However, I would still advocate for a more centralized approach to this problem. For instance, the NCL has a huge library of contributed functions which they distribute along with the code. By now, I am sure that xarray users have basically reimplemented equivalents to all of these functions, but without a centralized home it is still too difficult to find or contribute new codes.

For instance, I have a useful wrapper to scipy.ndimage that I use all the time, but it seems overkill to release/support a whole package for this one module. I would be much more likely to contribute a PR to a community run repository. I am also much more likely to use such a repo.

I would be more than willing to volunteer for such an effort, but I think it needs to involve multiple people. Various individuals have tried to make such repos on their own, but none seem to have reached critical mass. For example, https://github.com/crusaderky/xarray_extras https://github.com/fujiisoup/xr-scipy I think there should be multiple maintainers, so that if one person drops out, there still appears to be activity on the repo.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  xarray contrib module 290593053
480036151 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/1850#issuecomment-480036151 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/1850 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ4MDAzNjE1MQ== rabernat 1197350 2019-04-04T19:41:59Z 2019-04-04T19:41:59Z MEMBER

FYI, we have started https://github.com/pangeo-data/awesome-open-climate-science. It is not xarray specific, but contains many xarray-related packages. Please contribute!

{
    "total_count": 5,
    "+1": 5,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
  xarray contrib module 290593053

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 1764.464ms · About: xarray-datasette