issue_comments

Table actions

3 rows where issue = 748264086 and user = 14808389 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

  • keewis · 3 ✖

issue 1

  • clean up upstream-dev CI · 3 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
732331278 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4599#issuecomment-732331278 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4599 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDczMjMzMTI3OA== keewis 14808389 2020-11-23T18:05:31Z 2020-11-23T18:11:49Z MEMBER

That's somewhat different, I think. Branch protection defines CI that has to pass in order to be able to merge the PR, while allowed failures change the result of the CI. For the current implementation of this, see the changes in #4584.

Edit: the continue-on-error setting will do the same, except the job passes silently which is not ideal

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   clean up upstream-dev CI 748264086
732284031 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4599#issuecomment-732284031 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4599 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDczMjI4NDAzMQ== keewis 14808389 2020-11-23T16:47:46Z 2020-11-23T16:47:46Z MEMBER

If I remember correctly, we decided to mark the upstream-dev CI as allowed failure. If there's a way to mark the PR CI as such, I think the only benefit is that a allowed failure of the old azure CI is a bit more visible (see https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4584#issuecomment-729726028).

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   clean up upstream-dev CI 748264086
732275375 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4599#issuecomment-732275375 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4599 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDczMjI3NTM3NQ== keewis 14808389 2020-11-23T16:33:19Z 2020-11-23T16:33:19Z MEMBER

great, thanks again, @andersy005. Let's merge now and leave the choice between the old and new PR CI to a different PR.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   clean up upstream-dev CI 748264086

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]);