Skip to content

Conversation

gfyoung
Copy link
Member

@gfyoung gfyoung commented Jul 16, 2016

Per discussion with @jorisvandenbossche here.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jul 16, 2016

Current coverage is 84.38%

Merging #13668 into master will not change coverage

@@             master     #13668   diff @@
==========================================
  Files           142        142          
  Lines         51223      51223          
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches          0          0          
==========================================
  Hits          43223      43223          
  Misses         8000       8000          
  Partials          0          0          

Powered by Codecov. Last updated by d7c028d...8183e04

@sinhrks sinhrks added API Design IO SQL to_sql, read_sql, read_sql_query labels Jul 16, 2016
@sinhrks sinhrks added this to the 0.19.0 milestone Jul 16, 2016
@gfyoung
Copy link
Member Author

gfyoung commented Jul 24, 2016

@sinhrks , @jorisvandenbossche , @jreback : any updates on this? Seems relatively trivial to merge.

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Jul 24, 2016

lgtm. @jorisvandenbossche

@jorisvandenbossche
Copy link
Member

Sorry for the delay.
I did a quick search on github, and few people did actually use this in their code (and that were not copies of pandas), so not sure this is worth to change.
I meant we should have made it internal when it was added in 0.14, but not sure if it is worth to change.

@gfyoung
Copy link
Member Author

gfyoung commented Jul 24, 2016

@jorisvandenbossche : Ah, that's a good point. If the intention was internal, but people are actually using this function for their own pandas engines, I wonder if we should even make it internal at all. It seems like it could be useful for people's own custom usages then.

@jorisvandenbossche
Copy link
Member

Yep, then we just let it be :-)

@jorisvandenbossche jorisvandenbossche modified the milestones: No action, 0.19.0 Jul 24, 2016
@jorisvandenbossche
Copy link
Member

Sorry for my inclarity triggering you to action

@gfyoung
Copy link
Member Author

gfyoung commented Jul 24, 2016

No worries. Good that we at least investigated.

@gfyoung gfyoung deleted the pandas-sql-builder-private branch July 24, 2016 19:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
API Design IO SQL to_sql, read_sql, read_sql_query
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants