DOC: organize stringmethods in what's new #9654
Merged
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
sinhrks
changed the title
Member
|
@sinhrks Thanks! But, you will have to rebase (and probably solve some conflicts after my PR that reorganized the whatsnew file a bit). But you can put the section under "New features" (eg just before 'other enhancements') |
sinhrks
force-pushed
the
stringdocs
branch
2 times, most recently
from
fadba32 to
9b6418d
Compare
Member
Author
|
Sure, rebased. |
doc/source/whatsnew/v0.16.0.txt
Outdated
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you make this the same level as the one above (with ^^ I think)
jorisvandenbossche
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 16, 2015
DOC: organize stringmethods in what's new
Member
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Added summarized section to the release note based on the discussion in #9386