[GitHub] [arrow] itamarst commented on pull request #7169: ARROW-5359: [Python] Support loading non-nanosecond out-of-range timestamps

2020-05-27 Thread GitBox
itamarst commented on pull request #7169: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/7169#issuecomment-634853818 @jorisvandenbossche are you happy with this as is, or do you want semantic changes to the flag? This is an

[GitHub] [arrow] itamarst commented on pull request #7169: ARROW-5359: [Python] Support loading non-nanosecond out-of-range timestamps

2020-05-19 Thread GitBox
itamarst commented on pull request #7169: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/7169#issuecomment-630868204 OK, I've addressed the testing comments, so we're down to semantics and naming of the flag. This is an

[GitHub] [arrow] itamarst commented on pull request #7169: ARROW-5359: [Python] Support loading non-nanosecond out-of-range timestamps

2020-05-19 Thread GitBox
itamarst commented on pull request #7169: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/7169#issuecomment-630861784 Actually, how about changing the keyword to "dont_force_nanosecond_timetamp" or something? That would address two of your concerns.

[GitHub] [arrow] itamarst commented on pull request #7169: ARROW-5359: [Python] Support loading non-nanosecond out-of-range timestamps

2020-05-19 Thread GitBox
itamarst commented on pull request #7169: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/7169#issuecomment-630861038 Ah yes, will do. Any thoughts on the remaining inline review comment re objects for nanosecond? This is an