issue_comments
5 rows where issue = 35564268 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)
issue 1
- Fix decode_cf_variable. · 5 ✖
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
45960686 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/153#issuecomment-45960686 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/153 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ1OTYwNjg2 | shoyer 1217238 | 2014-06-12T23:31:51Z | 2014-06-12T23:31:51Z | MEMBER | OK, I guess this is fine -- I merged the other PR. I will open another issue for exposing a public interface to decoding functions. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Fix decode_cf_variable. 35564268 | |
45952834 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/153#issuecomment-45952834 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/153 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ1OTUyODM0 | akleeman 514053 | 2014-06-12T21:51:47Z | 2014-06-12T21:51:47Z | CONTRIBUTOR | So ... do you want me to remove the tests and only include the .data -> .values fix? Re: api. I'm working on a better storage scheme for reflectivity data, which involves CF decoding plus remapping some values. I could build my own data store which implements the netcdf store and adds the extra layer there .. but just using decode_cf_variable is far easier. In general, I can imagine a situation where we would want to allow users to provide their own decoding functions, but thats a larger project. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Fix decode_cf_variable. 35564268 | |
45949753 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/153#issuecomment-45949753 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/153 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ1OTQ5NzUz | shoyer 1217238 | 2014-06-12T21:22:26Z | 2014-06-12T21:22:26Z | MEMBER | No, just that it's unclear if it's a good idea to add tests (or functionality) to internal functions in ways for features that aren't used internally. On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:29 PM, akleeman notifications@github.com wrote:
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Fix decode_cf_variable. 35564268 | |
45943780 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/153#issuecomment-45943780 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/153 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ1OTQzNzgw | akleeman 514053 | 2014-06-12T20:29:28Z | 2014-06-12T20:29:28Z | CONTRIBUTOR | I'm confused, are you saying we shouldn't add tests for internal functions? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Fix decode_cf_variable. 35564268 | |
45921269 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/153#issuecomment-45921269 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/153 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ1OTIxMjY5 | shoyer 1217238 | 2014-06-12T17:19:23Z | 2014-06-12T17:19:23Z | MEMBER | I'm not opposed to this in principle, but this is an internal API that wasn't really for external consumption. If you're relying on this in external code, then we should think about what the public API should be and add tests there, not for this internal function. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Fix decode_cf_variable. 35564268 |
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 2