issue_comments

Table actions

where issue = 467865659 and user = 1217238 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

These facets timed out: author_association, issue

user 1

  • shoyer · 3 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
522359045 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/3128#issuecomment-522359045 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3128 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUyMjM1OTA0NQ== shoyer 1217238 2019-08-18T21:53:08Z 2019-08-18T21:53:08Z MEMBER

My (limited) understanding of how github handles reverting is that you'll still need to make a new pull request to apply your edits either way. There is no more going to back to amend after PR is merges. The only difference is what the state of "master" looks like when you make your new pull request (whether it includes your partial changes or not).

So I don't think it particularly matters if you revert first (as long as the forward fix happens relatively soon), but if you'd prefer to do it that way that's totally fine -- let me know and I will do it.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Support keyword API for `Dataset.drop` 467865659
522354720 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/3128#issuecomment-522354720 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3128 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUyMjM1NDcyMA== shoyer 1217238 2019-08-18T20:56:29Z 2019-08-18T20:56:29Z MEMBER

Post merge reviews are totally fine. It is not a big deal to revert a merge if needed.

 
{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Support keyword API for `Dataset.drop` 467865659
511229790 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/3128#issuecomment-511229790 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3128 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMTIyOTc5MA== shoyer 1217238 2019-07-14T19:41:38Z 2019-07-14T19:41:38Z MEMBER

Awesome, thanks for working on this @gwgundersen !

In the long term, we might want to deprecate the current function signature, but I'm happy to leave that for later.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Support keyword API for `Dataset.drop` 467865659

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]);