Conversation
|
Does the whatsnew from #51335 need to be changed/reverted? |
|
@jbrockmendel - yes, it did - thanks. |
|
OK this looks fine. Let's reiterate the plan for when i inevitably forget: merge this, backport to 2.0, then for 2.1 do either #51923, which might need to be updated to un-revert some or all of this? |
|
Is this ready for 2.0? |
|
I believe this is ready, wanted to make sure @jbrockmendel is on board with the plan. I think both this and #51955 would be good for 2.0.1. |
|
Ack - need to update the whatsnew, so no, this isn't ready anymore. |
|
Yes I am on board with the plan. |
|
I'm a bit more negative on this now. With 2.0.0 now released, this with #51955 will now reintroduce bad behavior (test_minmax_tzaware_skipna_axis_1 is xfailed). I'm going to see if I can get that test working in #51955, and if this is the case then I think we can go foward. Without being able to fix that test, I think this path should be abandoned and we should instead pursue (a) increase perf of transpose as @jorisvandenbossche has suggested (#52083) and (b) use online ops where possible as @jbrockmendel has suggested (#52083 (comment)). |
|
I like this plan; I'm excited to be a part of it. |
|
I don't see any reasonable way to support axis=1 with tzaware dtypes by operating on NumPy arrays - so I think there is no way forward in this direction. |
Ref: #51955 (comment)
doc/source/whatsnew/vX.X.X.rstfile if fixing a bug or adding a new feature.@jbrockmendel - this only reverts the change to
_reduce, but leaves other changes untouched. Would you prefer to revert all of #51335?