BrandonFors/pandas-github-issues huggingface dataset:
DEPS: Added tz keyword to to_datetime function, deprecates utc
State: closed

- [x] closes #13712
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x] whatsnew entry

Labels:
name: Datetime
description: Datetime data dtype
name: Compat
description: pandas objects compatability with Numpy or Python functions
name: Deprecate
description: Functionality to remove in pandas

Comments:
Hello @harpolea! Thanks for updating the PR.





Cheers ! There are no PEP8 issues in this Pull Request. :beers: 

##### Comment last updated on September 01, 2017 at 13:50 Hours UTC
note that we just merged: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17109

so rebase
In general, I am wondering whether it is actually needed to deprecate the keyword / worth the trouble for all impacted users. 
I am certainly + 1 on adding tz keyword. But we can keep utc=True just as an alias for tz='utc'
why don't we put a DeprecationWanring on  utc rather than a FutureWarninhg

kind of a soft deprecation 
can you rebase / update
can u rebase and move note to 0.22
can you rebase / move note to 0.22.0
closing as stale, but if you'd like to keep working, ping and we can reopen
DOC: to_datetime format argument examples
State: closed

- [ ] closes #16669



Labels:
name: Docs

Comments:
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17412?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> :exclamation: No coverage uploaded for pull request base (`master@9cc3333`). [Click here to learn what that means](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/error-reference#section-missing-base-commit).
> The diff coverage is `n/a`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17412/graphs/tree.svg?token=eZ4WkYLtcO&src=pr&height=150&width=650)](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17412?src=pr&el=tree)

```diff
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master   #17412   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   91.02%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      163           
  Lines             ?    49581           
  Branches          ?        0           
=========================================
  Hits              ?    45130           
  Misses            ?     4451           
  Partials          ?        0
```

| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| #multiple | `88.8% <ø> (?)` | |
| #single | `40.26% <ø> (?)` | |


------

[Continue to review full report at Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17412?src=pr&el=continue).
> **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta)
> `Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data`
> Powered by [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17412?src=pr&el=footer). Last update [9cc3333...4a4bde4](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17412?src=pr&el=lastupdated). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments).

@philipphanemann Thanks! 
(fixed the merge conflict and removed the link to "timestamp vs timespan/period" (I don't think this was a correct link)
TST: remove tests and docs for legacy (pre 0.12) hdf5 support
State: closed

- [ ] closes #xxxx
- [ ] tests added / passed
- [ ] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry

Removing tests for old compatability because this issue is sufficiently old now, that people should be expected to have solved this themselves by now.

The first commit removes the legacy test for pandas v0.10. The second commit removes the legacy test for pandas v0.11.

This pull request replaces #17398. 

See also discussion in #17375.

Labels:
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite
name: IO HDF5
description: read_hdf, HDFStore
name: Compat
description: pandas objects compatability with Numpy or Python functions

Comments:
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#17404](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/commit/062f6f118fe4ea439ae255a8ff886a532e20ecdb?src=pr&el=desc) will **decrease** coverage by `0.02%`.
> The diff coverage is `n/a`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404/graphs/tree.svg?width=650&src=pr&token=eZ4WkYLtcO&height=150)](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=tree)

```diff
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #17404      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.03%   91.01%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         163      163              
  Lines       49580    49580              
==========================================
- Hits        45137    45126      -11     
- Misses       4443     4454      +11
```

| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| #multiple | `88.8% <ø> (ø)` | :arrow_up: |
| #single | `40.25% <ø> (-0.07%)` | :arrow_down: |

| [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=tree) | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| [pandas/io/gbq.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2lvL2dicS5weQ==) | `25% <0%> (-58.34%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/core/frame.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvZnJhbWUucHk=) | `97.72% <0%> (-0.1%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/io/pytables.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2lvL3B5dGFibGVzLnB5) | `92.79% <0%> (-0.09%)` | :arrow_down: |

------

[Continue to review full report at Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=continue).
> **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta)
> `Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data`
> Powered by [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=footer). Last update [062f6f1...330b2cd](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17404?src=pr&el=lastupdated). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments).

thanks!
Tslib unused
State: closed

along with one repeated string and a case in `_Timedelta.__richcmp__` that is not reachable.

- [ ] closes #17379
- [ ] tests added / passed
- [ ] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Internals
description: Related to non-user accessible pandas implementation
name: Timedelta
description: Timedelta data type
name: Clean

Comments:
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#17402](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/commit/062f6f118fe4ea439ae255a8ff886a532e20ecdb?src=pr&el=desc) will **decrease** coverage by `0.04%`.
> The diff coverage is `n/a`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402/graphs/tree.svg?src=pr&token=eZ4WkYLtcO&width=650&height=150)](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=tree)

```diff
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #17402      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.03%   90.99%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         163      163              
  Lines       49580    49580              
==========================================
- Hits        45137    45116      -21     
- Misses       4443     4464      +21
```

| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| #multiple | `88.77% <ø> (-0.03%)` | :arrow_down: |
| #single | `40.26% <ø> (-0.07%)` | :arrow_down: |

| [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=tree) | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| [pandas/io/gbq.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2lvL2dicS5weQ==) | `25% <0%> (-58.34%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/plotting/\_converter.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL3Bsb3R0aW5nL19jb252ZXJ0ZXIucHk=) | `63.23% <0%> (-1.82%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/core/frame.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvZnJhbWUucHk=) | `97.72% <0%> (-0.1%)` | :arrow_down: |

------

[Continue to review full report at Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=continue).
> **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta)
> `Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data`
> Powered by [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=footer). Last update [062f6f1...3ebd4ab](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17402?src=pr&el=lastupdated). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments).

Closes #17379
TST: Remove tests for hdf files created with pandas <= v0.11
State: closed

- [ x] closes #17375
- [ ] tests added / passed
- [ ] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x ] whatsnew entry

Tests for old compatability removed because this issue is sufficiently old now, that people should be expected to have solved this by now.

@jreback , the methods ``test_legacy_table_read`` and ``test_legacy_table_write`` don't say if they concern pandas <=0.11 or it's newer compatability issues. It it ok to remove those?

See also discussion in #17375.

Labels:
name: Testing
description: pandas testing functions or related to the test suite
name: IO HDF5
description: read_hdf, HDFStore

Comments:
I'm having some strange issue with changes in the the doc directory not being registered by git, so I'm having problems by v0.21.txt + some other issues.

I'm going do everything over again in a new pull request.
@topper-123 even if you clean-up your branch locally, you can still push to the same branch on your fork to update this PR
I made the changes to ``v0.21.txt`` in the Github online editor, but that got me those red crosses. 

I really don't know what's causing this and i'm not interested in investigating. I would rather just start over (unless you got a quick tip I could try out)
This has been replaced by #17404. Closing.
DOC: Adding methods for "bad" lines that preserve all data
State: closed

- [ ] closes #17319 


Labels:
name: Docs
name: IO CSV
description: read_csv, to_csv

Comments:
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#17385](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/commit/64c8a8d6fecacb796da8265ace870a4fcab98092?src=pr&el=desc) will **decrease** coverage by `0.01%`.
> The diff coverage is `n/a`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385/graphs/tree.svg?width=650&src=pr&token=eZ4WkYLtcO&height=150)](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=tree)

```diff
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #17385      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.03%   91.02%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         163      163              
  Lines       49580    49580              
==========================================
- Hits        45137    45128       -9     
- Misses       4443     4452       +9
```

| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| #multiple | `88.8% <ø> (ø)` | :arrow_up: |
| #single | `40.26% <ø> (-0.07%)` | :arrow_down: |

| [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=tree) | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| [pandas/io/gbq.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2lvL2dicS5weQ==) | `25% <0%> (-58.34%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/core/frame.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvZnJhbWUucHk=) | `97.72% <0%> (-0.1%)` | :arrow_down: |

------

[Continue to review full report at Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=continue).
> **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta)
> `Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data`
> Powered by [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=footer). Last update [64c8a8d...2481db9](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17385?src=pr&el=lastupdated). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments).

closing as stale. its a worthwhile addition i you can respond to comment (ping and we can reopen).
TST: not correctly using OrderedDict in test_series_apply
State: closed

in Python versions <3.6 this syntax will result in an unordered dict

- [ ] closes #xxxx
- [ ] tests added / passed
- [ ] 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:
@sylviawhoa : Thanks for reporting this!  Do you have a code-example or test where this was important?  We would like to be able to catch this in the future if it's actually important.
@gfyoung @sinhrks If your testing environment uses Python 3.6, this issue would be undetectable because in Python 3.6 all dictionaries are ordered, in which case you wouldn't need OrderedDict() at all. For earlier versions, this test may fail because you are calling OrderedDict() on a dictionary, hence preserving a random order. 

I found this issue because I searched my entire repo for instances of `OrderedDict({` to find OrderedDict called on a dictionary (since that was a bug I had that caused my tests to fail with 3.5). I have pandas installed in my virtual environment so this came up in the search.

Not sure how important this really is because it's only in a test, but it is an issue. 
thanks, this was a typo.
BUG: make order of index from pd.concat deterministic
State: closed

- [x] closes #17344
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `git diff master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Reshaping
description: Concat, Merge/Join, Stack/Unstack, Explode
name: Compat
description: pandas objects compatability with Numpy or Python functions

Comments:
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#17364](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/commit/e8a1765edf91ec4d087b46b90d5e54530550029b?src=pr&el=desc) will **increase** coverage by `<.01%`.
> The diff coverage is `100%`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364/graphs/tree.svg?token=eZ4WkYLtcO&src=pr&width=650&height=150)](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=tree)

```diff
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #17364      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.01%   91.02%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files         163      163              
  Lines       49561    49567       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        45107    45116       +9     
+ Misses       4454     4451       -3
```

| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| #multiple | `88.8% <100%> (+0.02%)` | :arrow_up: |
| #single | `40.25% <100%> (-0.06%)` | :arrow_down: |

| [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=tree) | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| [pandas/core/common.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvY29tbW9uLnB5) | `91.66% <100%> (+0.21%)` | :arrow_up: |
| [pandas/core/indexes/api.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvaW5kZXhlcy9hcGkucHk=) | `98.78% <100%> (-0.03%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/io/gbq.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2lvL2dicS5weQ==) | `25% <0%> (-58.34%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/core/frame.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvZnJhbWUucHk=) | `97.72% <0%> (-0.1%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/plotting/\_converter.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL3Bsb3R0aW5nL19jb252ZXJ0ZXIucHk=) | `65.05% <0%> (+1.81%)` | :arrow_up: |

------

[Continue to review full report at Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=continue).
> **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta)
> `Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data`
> Powered by [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=footer). Last update [e8a1765...e497502](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17364?src=pr&el=lastupdated). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments).

@jreback ping
thanks!
BUG: Respect dups in reindexing CategoricalIndex
State: closed

When the indexer is identical to the elements, we should still return duplicates when the indexer
contains duplicates.

Closes #17323.


Labels:
name: Bug
name: Indexing
description: Related to indexing on series/frames, not to indexes themselves
name: Categorical
description: Categorical Data Type

Comments:
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#17355](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/commit/473a7f3c186f6b0bfd9d3ce413fb627cf7a8f111?src=pr&el=desc) will **decrease** coverage by `0.01%`.
> The diff coverage is `100%`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355/graphs/tree.svg?width=650&height=150&src=pr&token=eZ4WkYLtcO)](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=tree)

```diff
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #17355      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.03%   91.02%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         162      162              
  Lines       49567    49567              
==========================================
- Hits        45125    45116       -9     
- Misses       4442     4451       +9
```

| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| #multiple | `88.8% <100%> (ø)` | :arrow_up: |
| #single | `40.24% <0%> (-0.07%)` | :arrow_down: |

| [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=tree) | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| [pandas/core/indexes/category.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvaW5kZXhlcy9jYXRlZ29yeS5weQ==) | `98.53% <100%> (ø)` | :arrow_up: |
| [pandas/io/gbq.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2lvL2dicS5weQ==) | `25% <0%> (-58.34%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [pandas/core/frame.py](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=tree#diff-cGFuZGFzL2NvcmUvZnJhbWUucHk=) | `97.72% <0%> (-0.1%)` | :arrow_down: |

------

[Continue to review full report at Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=continue).
> **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta)
> `Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data`
> Powered by [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=footer). Last update [473a7f3...83798b4](https://codecov.io/gh/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17355?src=pr&el=lastupdated). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments).

Is there a test that covers the case of this equal index but *without* duplicates ? (so for which the special casing is done) 
Didn't directly see it in the diff, but might be it is somewhere in the file
@jreback @jorisvandenbossche : I think I have addressed all of your requests.  The only remaining question revolves largely around we should in principle seed this test or leave it alone.
thanks!
ENH - GH:17160, DataFrame.pivot accepts a list of values
State: closed

- [x] closes #17160
- [x] tests added / passed
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [x] whatsnew entry


Labels:
name: Enhancement
name: Reshaping
description: Concat, Merge/Join, Stack/Unstack, Explode

Comments:
I can't figure out why the test_reindexing integration test failed. Can you give some instructions on how to proceed?
@BBQHarvey : Don't worry about it.  #17355 will take care of it.
closing as stale
BUG: Fixed regex in asv.conf.json
State: closed

In https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17293 I messed up the syntax. I
used a glob instead of a regex. According to the docs at
http://asv.readthedocs.io/en/latest/asv.conf.json.html#regressions-thresholds we
want to use a regex. I've actually manually tested this change and verified that
it works.

Labels:
name: Performance
description: Memory or execution speed performance

Comments:
BTW, I was looking at the published benchmarks and saw this strange one:

http://pandas.pydata.org/speed/pandas/#indexing.Int64Indexing.time_ix_list_like?&commits=f6f5ce5f9ce2afc3b6f55a3228b93024b121b88f

According to that, there would have been a big speed improvement in ix indexing. But locally I do not see this at all (I compared using asv this benchmark between 0.20.0 tag and master). Also, I am actually seeing the faster timings for both. 
Not really related to this thread, but it might indicate there is somewhere something going wrong with the reporting ?
Yeah, that seems buggy. I'll look into it.
Merging and re-running to double check. It's possible the environment was messed up; running them manually said that the benchmark failed, so I purged the environment and reran it, and it worked correctly.
@jorisvandenbossche same output. The recent timings look more correct than the old ones. I'm contemplating just purging all the records older than say 0.20.3 and just calling that our new baseline :/
I would certainly take 0.20.0 (many commits in master before 0.20.3 in date), or even 0.19 
Or we could also run only for the tags for some of the releases before?
I'll give 0.20.0 a shot.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Joris Van den Bossche <
notifications@github.com> wrote:

> I would certainly take 0.20.0 (many commits in master before 0.20.3 in
> date), or even 0.19
> Or we could also run only for the tags for some of the releases before?
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/17300#issuecomment-323856726>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQHIm8r0g2TCItINCpNJVVS1hgP38H2ks5safVdgaJpZM4O9fh4>
> .
>