[SPARK-30464][PYTHON][DOCS] Explicitly note that we don't add "pandas compatible" aliases #27142
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
Author
rxin
reviewed
Jan 9, 2020
Contributor
|
LGTM other than that minor comment |
|
Test build #116334 has finished for PR 27142 at commit
|
|
Test build #116335 has finished for PR 27142 at commit
|
Member
Author
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR adds a note that we're not adding "pandas compatible" aliases anymore.
Why are the changes needed?
We added "pandas compatible" aliases as of #5544 and #6066 . There are too many differences and I don't think it makes sense to add such aliases anymore at this moment.
I was even considering deprecating them out but decided to take a more conservative approache by just documenting it.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Existing tests should cover.