issue_comments
4 rows where issue = 371514413 and user = 1217238 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: reactions
These facets timed out: author_association, issue
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at ▲ | author_association | body | reactions | performed_via_github_app | issue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
431868326 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2492#issuecomment-431868326 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2492 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzMTg2ODMyNg== | shoyer 1217238 | 2018-10-22T15:26:24Z | 2018-10-22T15:26:24Z | MEMBER | thanks @alexamici |
{ "total_count": 1, "+1": 1, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
ENH: Detect the GRIB files by the filename extension and suggest engine. 371514413 | |
431425504 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2492#issuecomment-431425504 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2492 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzMTQyNTUwNA== | shoyer 1217238 | 2018-10-19T16:44:19Z | 2018-10-19T16:44:32Z | MEMBER | As someone who hasn't opened up a grib file for several years, I'm not in a good position to choose which backend to use by default. For now, I would be inclined to hold off on making a default choice (unless there is a clear consensus among other xarray devs/users) in favor of requiring users to be explicit. This is somewhat inline with the Zen of Python: "In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess." Probably the best user experience would be to raise an informative error suggesting the use of cfgrib or pynio when opening a grib but no engine is specified, e.g., ```
|
{ "total_count": 3, "+1": 3, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
ENH: Detect the GRIB files by the filename extension and suggest engine. 371514413 | |
431166092 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2492#issuecomment-431166092 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2492 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzMTE2NjA5Mg== | shoyer 1217238 | 2018-10-18T21:15:10Z | 2018-10-18T21:15:10Z | MEMBER | Actually, thinking about this a little more, I'm not entirely sure it makes sense to fallback from using pynio to cfgrib. The problem is that these libraries may interpret GRIB files differently, e.g., with different variable names. It could make for a poor user experience for (please let me know if I'm mistaken here!) |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
ENH: Detect the GRIB files by the filename extension and suggest engine. 371514413 | |
431053815 | https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2492#issuecomment-431053815 | https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2492 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzMTA1MzgxNQ== | shoyer 1217238 | 2018-10-18T15:28:06Z | 2018-10-18T15:28:06Z | MEMBER |
Agreed! Yes, this would be welcome. I'm happy with this change, but it would be good to ensure we have test coverage. It looks like we currently don't have any unit tests, but I'm pretty sure the other code is exercised by integration tests. If you're up for adding unit tests for |
{ "total_count": 1, "+1": 1, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
ENH: Detect the GRIB files by the filename extension and suggest engine. 371514413 |
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