Backport PR #46567 on branch 1.4.x (BUG: groupby().rolling(freq) with monotonic dates within groups #46065 ) #46592
Conversation
This file contains 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
simonjayhawkins
added
Error Reporting
no problem. will move it later (once the other note is synced up with main) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Backport PRs #46567, #46087
@mroeschke marked as draft as this PR also backports #46087 (which conflicts that caused the autobackport to fail)
The only conflict doing this was the release note in 1.5 (which would need a separate PR to move on main) (side note: why was the release note for #46567 in bug fix section and not regression?)
#46087 is labelled as an enhancement but could also be considered a bugfix? Although saying that, I think we generally don't consider changes to error message to be API changes (only changes to exception type)?
wdyt about backporting #46087? No pressure, but if you prefer not to, I will leave it to you to do the manual backport ! (you are more familiar with this code so less likely to make a mistake)