issue_comments

Table actions

3 rows where issue = 760574919 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 2

issue 1

  • increase the visibility of the upstream-dev PR 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
762915707 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4670#issuecomment-762915707 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4670 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc2MjkxNTcwNw== keewis 14808389 2021-01-19T15:26:38Z 2021-01-19T15:27:21Z MEMBER

now that we fully switched to github and have a PR upstream-dev CI which is skipped unless explicitly requested, the only remaining issue here is that py38-flaky is not marked as "allowed failure". This does not seem to be an issue in practice so I think this can be closed.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   increase the visibility of the upstream-dev PR CI 760574919
742081518 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4670#issuecomment-742081518 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4670 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc0MjA4MTUxOA== keewis 14808389 2020-12-09T21:43:21Z 2020-12-09T22:01:39Z MEMBER

if we all agree on that, I've got two questions left: - should we keep the pipelines or github actions PR CI (or neither)? - should the remaining one be marked as "allowed failure"?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   increase the visibility of the upstream-dev PR CI 760574919
742047513 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4670#issuecomment-742047513 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4670 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc0MjA0NzUxMw== shoyer 1217238 2020-12-09T21:01:27Z 2020-12-09T21:01:27Z MEMBER

Our new scheduled nightly CI improves the situation quite a bit since we automatically get a issue containing the failures, but that means we aren't able to catch these failures before actually merging. As pointed out in #4574 (comment) that might be acceptable, though.

I agree, I think is probably an acceptable compromise.

Most bugs with upstream-dev occur with existing code in xarray, not new code introduced by a PR.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   increase the visibility of the upstream-dev PR CI 760574919

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]);