BrandonFors/pandas-github-issues huggingface dataset:
TST: DataFrame.interpolate(axis='columns') throws exception while DataFrame.interpolate(axis=1) not (#25190)
State: closed

Make sure that DataFrame.interpolate allows setting having "columns" or "index" as the `axis` argument.

I included the `whatsnew` entry as well. However, since the bug was already fixed in v1.0.0, it might be reasonable to just drop it. I leave it to the reviewer's discretion, that's why I've put it in a separate commit.

- [x] closes #25190
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite
name: Missing-data
description: np.nan, pd.NaT, pd.NA, dropna, isnull, interpolate

Comments:
@YagoGG : Changes look good, but it seems we have some unrelated test failures just as in https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/31566.
@YagoGG can you rebase
@jbrockmendel done!
Hey @gfyoung / @jbrockmendel! Just a friendly reminder of this. Please let me know if you need further changes before merging.

Thanks!
@YagoGG can you fix merge conflicts and address comments?
can you merge master and update to comments
@YagoGG closing as stale. ping if you want to continue.
> can you merge master and update to comments

opened a new pull request #34132, wasn't able to push here.
Fix docstring for to_markdown buf parameter
State: closed

- [ ] ~~closes #xxxx~~ (N/A)
- [ ] ~~tests added / passed~~ (N/A)
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] ~~whatsnew entry~~ (N/A)


Labels:
name: Docs

Comments:
thanks @jakevdp
Backport PR: BUG: Array.__setitem__ failing with nullable boolean mask (#31484)
State: closed

- [ ] closes #xxxx
- [ ] tests added / passed
- [ ] passes `black pandas`
- [ ] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Indexing
description: Related to indexing on series/frames, not to indexes themselves
name: Missing-data
description: np.nan, pd.NaT, pd.NA, dropna, isnull, interpolate

Comments:
looks good
thanks for the tip! appreciate a lot! @WillAyd 
emm, error does not seem to be related to this pr, #30588 
thanks @charlesdong1991
REF: organize DataFrame tests for indexing, by-method
State: closed

The only change that isnt just rearrangement is implementing where_frame fixture in test_where and using it to get rid of for-loops inside a bunch of tests in that file

Labels:
name: Refactor
description: Internal refactoring of code
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite
name: Indexing
description: Related to indexing on series/frames, not to indexes themselves

Comments:
ping
thanks!
[MRG] f-string updates for issue #29547
State: closed

Addresses, in part, https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/issues/29547 

…ape/pivot, reshape/reshape

- [ x] xref #29547 
- [n/a ] tests added / passed
- [x ] passes `black pandas`
- [ x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [n/a ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Code Style
description: Code style, linting, code_checks

Comments:
Hello @abbiepopa! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for [PEP 8](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008) issues, and found:













There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! :beers: 

##### Comment last updated at 2020-02-03 04:07:53 UTC
Thank you @WillAyd , I covered the changes you requested. I'm having some trouble figuring out why I'm failing the current tests. LMK if it's obvious to you, otherwise I will continue investigating.
Thanks, Abbie!

> I'm having some trouble figuring out why I'm failing the current tests

If you click on 'details' next to, say, "CI / Checks", you'll see an 'X' near 'linting'. If you expand it, you'll see
```
black --version
black, version 19.10b0
Checking black formatting
would reformat /home/runner/work/pandas/pandas/pandas/core/reshape/concat.py
would reformat /home/runner/work/pandas/pandas/pandas/core/reshape/melt.py
would reformat /home/runner/work/pandas/pandas/pandas/core/reshape/pivot.py
would reformat /home/runner/work/pandas/pandas/pandas/core/reshape/merge.py
Oh no! 💥 💔 💥
4 files would be reformatted, 923 files would be left unchanged.
```
So for a start, you need to run `black` again any file you've changed. For example,

```
black pandas/core/reshape/concat.py
```

The [contributing guide](https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/development/contributing.html#contributing-to-the-code-base) has some more info about this.
Thank you, @MarcoGorelli ! Looks like the latest failure is a timeout. ~Is there a way to retrigger the test that timed out?~ Never mind, I found some instructions in the contributor wiki, retrying now.
Yay! Thanks @WillAyd and @MarcoGorelli . LMK if you need additional changes etc.
Thanks @jreback and @MomIsBestFriend ! I updated based on your reviews.
Great thanks @abbiepopa
Backport PR #31545 on branch 1.0.x (BUG&TST: df.replace fail after converting to new dtype)
State: closed

Backport PR #31545: BUG&TST: df.replace fail after converting to new dtype

Labels:
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite
name: Dtype Conversions
description: Unexpected or buggy dtype conversions

Comments:
I think need to back port #31484 first - @charlesdong1991 something you can do?
never did that well, I could try @WillAyd 
i think i messed it up, have to close it, I would appreciate a lot if you could give some help or directly take it over. @WillAyd 
checkout the 1.0.x branch locally and cherry pick the squashed commit from your other PR on top of it. Then push to GitHub targeting the 1.0 branch instead of master
thanks for quick reply! emm, thats basically what i did, but somehow got tons of other commits along with, not sure if the master branch i have locally is way ahead of 1.0.x?
ahh!, get it! @WillAyd i accidentally merge master to 1.0.x , my bad, new PR is there! and looks good
#31562
@charlesdong1991 can you rebase this (on this branch)
yeah, i am pretty going nuts by an error, i `remote add` the repo, and rebased on this branch, but when i am pushing the commits, get  

```
remote: Invalid username or password.
fatal: Authentication failed for 'https://github.com/meeseeksmachine/pandas.git/'
```
but i am 100% sure it is correct because i am using it to login/out my github account, any reason why this could happen? @jreback  🙏 
pushed https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/31584
sorry for that, I still could not figure out the problem 😞 and thanks for getting this done @jreback
REF: move _convert_to_indexer to Loc
State: closed

It is overriden in iLoc, so by putting it directly in Loc we can simplify bits of it that check `self.name` and keep only the `self.name == "loc"` branches.  This lets us get rid of a bit of dead code (L1638-L1642).

Most of the diff is misleading; it is only the one method that is moved, with a placeholder kept in NDFrameIndexer

Labels:
name: Refactor
description: Internal refactoring of code
name: Indexing
description: Related to indexing on series/frames, not to indexes themselves

Comments:
great!
BUG: to_json not allowing uploads to S3 (#28375)
State: closed

- [x] closes #28375
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Bug
name: IO JSON
description: read_json, to_json, json_normalize
name: IO Network
description: Local or Cloud (AWS, GCS, etc.) IO Issues

Comments:
Hi, @jschendel! Thanks a lot for reviewing, I just made the changes you requested.

I was surprised to see the test suite fail as both `./ci/run_tests.py` and `pytest pandas/tests/io/json/test_pandas.py -k to_s3` were passing in my Docker container (which has no AWS credentials whatsoever). Any ideas on why? I may make further contributions in the future and I want to make sure that my dev env works properly.

Anyways, let's see if it works this time!
> Any ideas on why? I may make further contributions in the future and I want to make sure that my dev env works properly.

Your environment is probably okay.  It looks like most failed due to  `ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'boto3'`.  We don't have `boto3` as required package for non-dev environments, so it's not present on many of the CI builds (we test under various versions of python, packages, operating systems, locales, etc).  The `s3_resource` gracefully handles this among other things.
@jschendel sounds good, thanks!

@jreback thanks for the feedback, I have just updated the PR accordingly.
Lgtm outside code checks / @jschendel comments
@jschendel thanks for the heads-up on the commit squashing, and apologies for the linter slip. I've updated the PR after making sure that the checks pass locally this time.

@WillAyd great, thank you!
thanks @YagoGG  nice patch; very responsive. keep em coming.
Is this issue fixed?
ADMIN: Create separate issue templates for different use cases
State: closed

I recall this being mentioned on one of the core dev calls a few months back, and took inspiration from [rapidsai/cudf](https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf) for the various templates.

Added templates for the following use cases:
- Bug Report
  - This is largely the same as the current issue template
- Documentation Enhancement
- Documentation Error
- Feature Request
- Submit Question
  - This attempts to direct users to StackOverflow for usage questions

We could also add a Blank Template for opening an issue without any template provided, but opted not to do that for now, as I don't want to encourage people to bypass these templates.  Could certainly add one if there's a consensus that we want this.

I've created a [local repo](https://github.com/jschendel/pandas-templates/issues) where you can see these templates in action since I couldn't figure out another way to actually display these.  Click the "New Issue" button to see what these changes would look like.

cc @pandas-dev/pandas-core @pandas-dev/pandas-triage 

Labels:
name: Admin
description: Administrative tasks related to the pandas project

Comments:
Nice idea. I think should consolidate the two Documentation templates into one. Also is there a way to just disallow submission of Usage Questions, instead just guiding people to the proper channel for those?
A few comments:

1. I agree with @WillAyd about merging the two documentation ones
2. On the documentation bug report, you say to indicate the line number, but most people reading the docs won't be looking at the source, so I don't think we should ask for line numbers.  Maybe relevant section name.
3. I think we should give some guidance about how to include the python code.  It's never been clear to me whether it is better to include the input/output from an ipython session or from a regular python session.
@jschendel still active?
Closing as I think stale, but can reopen if something you want to pick up later
@jschendel Do you mind if I revive this PR?
@MomIsBestFriend : sure, go for it
BUG: parase_dates column is in dataframe (#31251)
State: closed

- [ ] closes #31251 
- [ ] add test_missing_column in pandas/tests/io/parser/test_parse_dates.py
- [ ] passes `black pandas`
- [ ] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite

Comments:
I had made a mistake on trying to resolve conflict. will have to open a new PR.
My way around this kind of thing is:
```
git fetch upstream
git rebase upstream/master
```

But it's not a good practice because you'll need to force-push it

```
git push origin branch-name --force
```
@MomIsBestFriend  I think I messed up again and got the same problem in #31815. 
@sathyz I reccomend you to read [this](https://datapythonista.me/blog/useful-git-commands.html), which is a blog written by @datapythonista
BUG: GH31142 Fix for combine.Series
State: closed

- [ ] closes #31142
- [ ] tests added / passed
- [ ] passes `black pandas`
- [ ] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Bug

Comments:
Hello @jamesharrop! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for [PEP 8](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008) issues, and found:







There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! :beers: 

##### Comment last updated at 2020-05-27 18:21:57 UTC
Thanks James!

I think there will be some other comments, but it looks like you haven't applied `black` (see [contributing to the codebase](https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/development/contributing.html#contributing-to-the-code-base)), and that the docstring doesn't quite conform to the [docstring standards](https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/development/contributing_docstring.html), so in the meantime I'd advise you to read these documents
Hi Marco
Thanks for your helpful comments, I have tried to make those corrections now.
Thanks - looks like there's some conflicts that need to be resolved, see [here](https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/development/contributing.html#updating-your-pull-request) for how to do that
@jamesharrop still active? As mentioned by @jbrockmendel we don't want to add another public method here; there's a few other comments / questions outstanding
@jamesharrop thanks for the PR - is this still active? 
Closing as stale but ping if you'd like to pick back up
BUG&TST: df.replace fail after converting to new dtype
State: closed

- [x] closes #31517 
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry



Labels:
name: Bug
name: Reshaping
description: Concat, Merge/Join, Stack/Unstack, Explode
name: Dtype Conversions
description: Unexpected or buggy dtype conversions

Comments:
This was solved by #31484 and here add a test to prove it works now, and thus close the issue, i think a whatsnew is not needed in this case
thanks @charlesdong1991 

backporting this to ensure that 1.0.x is tested as well.
TST: Added regression test
State: closed

- [x] closes #10329
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite
name: Timedelta
description: Timedelta data type

Comments:
Hello @MomIsBestFriend! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for [PEP 8](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008) issues, and found:



There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! :beers: 

##### Comment last updated at 2020-04-03 09:15:17 UTC
@MomIsBestFriend is moving this to tests.arithmetic something you're up for?  (theres lots more that needs attention in that directory, so getting comfortable with the box_with_array pattern there would be worthwhile)
@jbrockmendel I have to be honest here, I have tried to refactor the test case to use ```box_with_array```, But unfortunately I couldn't make it, just seems odd to me, plus it's kinda lacking a documentation, so it's hard for me to do so, if you have patience I would love if you could guide me a bit on how to do so.
> I have tried to refactor the test case to use box_with_array, But unfortunately I couldn't make it

I appreciate that you gave it a shot despite the lacking documentation.

The background: until relatively recently, we had separate arithmetic tests for Series/DataFrame/Index, and no systematic way of checking that these all behave the same (and in fact, they didnt).  So we've been collecting arithmetic tests in tests.arithmetic and parametrizing over box_with_array (which is roughly just `[DataFrame, Series, Index, pd.array]`) to ensure that the behavior is internally consistent.  As a result, we have a ton of tests there that are either duplicative or not fully parametrized.

The general pattern is to start with a test for just, say, Series:

```
def test_my_test():
     obj = pd.Series(...)
     other = ...
     expected = pd.Series(...)

     result = op(obj, other)
     tm.assert_series_equal(result, expected)
```

Parametrizing this over box_with_array would look like:

```
def test_my_test(box_with_array):
     obj = pd.Series(...)
     other = ...
     expected = pd.Series(...)  # <-- up to here, this can be copy/paste from the other version

     obj = tm.box_expected(obj, box_with_array)
     expected = tm.box_expected(expected, box_with_array)

     result = op(obj, other)
     tm.assert_equal(result, expected)
```

Does that help?

Note: for exposition this example is implicitly assuming that `obj` has a datetimelike dtype and that `other` is a scalar.
Can you add a `time` scalar to the `other` parametrization in test_dt64arr_add_sub_invalid?

This is looking really good, thanks.
lgtm. @jbrockmendel if any comments.
Looks like tests are failing on some paths that go through numexpr
@MomIsBestFriend 

can you merge master and see if you can get this to passing
LGTM
thanks @MomIsBestFriend
TST: Added regression test case
State: closed

Resurrection of #28966

- [x] closes #18549
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite

Comments:
off-topic @MomIsBestFriend if you're up for suggestions on things needing attention, in core.indexing L1983 is never reached in the tests and i _think_ it may be impossible, could use a fresh set of eyes to see if we can prove that hypothesis.  Also L892-901 is not reached, but i dont have a strong intuition for if that is possible.
@jbrockmendel Sure!

I always like it when you give me tasks:)
I don't have a lot of knowledge, but I am willing to learn.

Thank you, means a lot :+1: 
re-started azure
Closing this, as this PR is giving me more headache than I expected.
CLN: Replace isinstace(foo, Class) with isinstance(foo, ABCClass)
State: closed

- [x] ref #27353
- [ ] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Clean

Comments:
thanks @MomIsBestFriend
CI: Reverted changes related to 'jedi' warnings
State: closed

- [x] closes #31407
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:

Comments:
Hi, @MomIsBestFriend seems IPython hasn't fixed and released the new version, so I think this should wait?
@charlesdong1991 Thank you for the quick response :)

 It seemes that IPython did release a new upgrade (or maybe I had it outdated), anyway, I will re-base once in a while, until the problem is fixed, so we will know if it's fixed even if they fixed it but forgot to close the issue.

You are more than welcome to close this PR, but I haven't got warnings while trying it locally, but the problem is that I have  python ```3.8.1``` so I can't know for sure.
ah, okay, this is the issue i posted on ipython (the link is also in the #31407 description), seems still open, that's why i thought this should wait
ipython/ipython#12102
is this still active?
@jbrockmendel yes, I am updating this every week (ish)
@MomIsBestFriend can you close this until it becomes actionable?
Sure, Will reopen (and ping) when this is mergeable (if that's even a word)
BUG: Series multiplication with timedelta scalar numexpr path
State: closed

- [x] closes #31457 
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Regression
description: Functionality that used to work in a prior pandas version
name: Numeric Operations
description: Arithmetic, Comparison, and Logical operations

Comments:
thanks @jbrockmendel
REGR: Categorical with np.str_ categories
State: closed

- [x] closes #31499
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `black pandas`
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Dtype Conversions
description: Unexpected or buggy dtype conversions
name: Categorical
description: Categorical Data Type

Comments:
What's the proposed fix? Convert these to regular strings early on?

IMO, we should deprecate the old behavior first if it isn't too costly. This PR doesn't seem too bad, though I don't really understand all its implications.
>  I think we should be santizing these inputs on Index construction; we already do this for Series IIRC 

I thought as well, but that doesn't seem to be the case:

```
In [1]: s = pd.Series([np.str_("0"), np.str_("1")])  

In [2]: s[0]        
Out[2]: '0'

In [3]: type(s[0])  
Out[3]: numpy.str_
```

I would keep a possible sanitation for a separate issue / discussion. This PRs seems an easy fix to address the regression.
this is just an unsupportable bandaid. this is handling a leak of np.str_ into the internals, which is really bad. I don't think its worth trying to fix this for 1.0.1 like this, rather address a systematic real fix. 

The reason this is unsupportable is that now this hides this issue in one particular place, rather than actually handling it (by converting np.str_ to str on construction).
> this is just an unsupportable bandaid. this is handling a leak of np.str_ into the internals, which is really bad. 

It is what we did before for years. So I don't think it is that unsupportable. 

Since we can still store numpy strings in a Series, and since we supported converting those to a Categorical before, I think this is a good fix. 

For 1.1, we can discuss further if we want to keep supporting this, or want to deprecate it, or want to sanitize on input (to avoid needing to support it).
> For 1.1, we can discuss further if we want to keep supporting this, or want to deprecate it, or want to sanitize on input (to avoid needing to support it).

Agreed.
these last minute patches are just causing more and more issues. do what you will this.
@jbrockmendel are you aware of any maintenance burdens or ambiguities this might cause?

At least on 0.25.3, we seem to treat `str` and `np.str_` equivalently in methods like `get_loc` and `unique`
> are you aware of any maintenance burdens or ambiguities this might cause?

Not especially.  If we want to root np.str_ out entirely, that would be a pretty big endeavor.
OK. Naively, I agree that rooting out `np.str_` objects in our constructors sounds difficult. At the least, it would require a scan over the values and a couple isinstance checks on each value, which I'd like to avoid if it's not causing problems elsewhere. I'm sure we'll get reports if it is.
Thanks @jbrockmendel.
Unpin openpyxl
State: closed

I *think* we pinned this originally because of issues with 3.0.2 specifically, but looks like a newer version is available on conda

ref #30009

Labels:
name: CI
description: Continuous Integration

Comments:
Could this become !=3.0.1 so we retain the knowledge that this one version is not supported
Thought about that but we don't do that for other packages do we?
fair enough.  LGTM
cc @datapythonista thoughts?
thanks @WillAyd