-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CLN: Removed coerce param in pd.to_timedelta and pd.to_datetime #13602
CLN: Removed coerce param in pd.to_timedelta and pd.to_datetime #13602
Conversation
9f0781d
to
2d5eaeb
Compare
Removal of prior version deprecations/changes | ||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | ||
|
||
- ``pd.to_timedelta`` has dropped the ``coerce`` parameter (:issue:`13602`) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
add what it's in favor of
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done. Old build to cancel here.
2d5eaeb
to
76e0bcd
Compare
Current coverage is 85.30% (diff: 100%)@@ master #13602 diff @@
==========================================
Files 140 139 -1
Lines 50634 50139 -495
Methods 0 0
Messages 0 0
Branches 0 0
==========================================
- Hits 43173 42771 -402
+ Misses 7461 7368 -93
Partials 0 0
|
@jreback : Travis is passing, so ready to merge if there are no other concerns. |
actually, I don't think this can be done w/o doing for |
and we generally are waiting much longer, see the list @jorisvandenbossche put up at the very bottom: any of those are fair game. Yes we could/should do some of the 0.17.0 ones, but let's get some of the others first. |
@jreback : so if I also remove the |
@gfyoung yes it is normally ok, but we SO many deprecations (esp from 0.17.0.), that I think let's clean everything up thats < 0.17.0 first. So I would say defer this to 0.20.0.. |
@jreback : Hmm...I'm not sure I totally follow that logic, especially since I do see a deprecation removal from |
yeah. I don't have a problem with anything from 0.17.0. BUT this is a 'biggie' (well to_datetime is really). So no objection if you include both (for consistency). But if you have a limited pool of PR energy, would prefer other ones to be addressed ..... |
@jreback : this one isn't that difficult to remove AFAICT - I'll also take a look at some of the other deprecation removals and put up PR's for those if I can. |
right, add on |
d0e4b05
to
a0455c8
Compare
@jreback : removed the |
Personally I would table this for 0.20 .. |
Maybe we need some more 'formal' rules on how long deprecations are kept at the minimum? Eg minimal two feature releases and minimal a year. |
@jorisvandenbossche: When has two feature releases ever taken more than a year? Two feature releases sure, but a year seems a little long too me, and not just because I would like to merge this ;) |
a0455c8
to
8f3e8a3
Compare
I think let's defer this one to 0.20. I don't see any downside to delaying this. |
8f3e8a3
to
ed5f093
Compare
We may not like it, but it is a fact that not all users upgrade each version but often skip a few at once ... |
@jorisvandenbossche : this deprecation removal process is somewhat new to me, and I was not aware of user tendencies to skip version upgrades (I generally follow them quite closely for my projects). However, I perfectly understand! I was being somewhat facetious when I mentioned that I wanted to merge this now from the |
a9c191f
to
a799398
Compare
0d6aae4
to
e3c54f5
Compare
0a968ed
to
18c4f9d
Compare
18c4f9d
to
091af83
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks OK to me!
1363567
to
eb62e50
Compare
@gfyoung can you force push again? (possibly due to the repo transfer the PRs open before the transfer cannot be merged from the github interface) |
@jorisvandenbossche if you merge this, we for sure need to branch 0.19.1 (which is ok) |
also should remove |
@jreback : Ah, good point. I didn't realize it had been deprecated back in |
@jreback : Actually, never mind! I did remove it in this PR! Need to change the title. |
ok lgtm. our first non-0.19.1 PR! |
eb62e50
to
c43d28f
Compare
Merged! Thanks @gfyoung |
@jorisvandenbossche so need to branch 0.19.1 (as this should not be included)! |
Deprecated back in `v0.17.0` <a href="https://github.com/pydata/pandas /commit/987b7e7e586b8df1d127406c69e0a9094a1a5322">here</a>. Seems appropriate to carry though now. Author: gfyoung <gfyoung17@gmail.com> Closes pandas-dev#13602 from gfyoung/remove-coerce-to-timedelta and squashes the following commits: 091af83 [gfyoung] CLN: Removed coerce param in pd.to_timedelta
Deprecated back in
v0.17.0
here. Seems appropriate to carry though now.