DOC: Fix order section in docstrings (part II)

[alexander-ponomaroff]

• closes DOC: Fix docstrings error GL07 - Sections are in the wrong order #24125
• passes git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff

This is to build on #24126 .

As I commented in the issue, this pull request will fix additional 10 out of 24 errors. 14 errors will remain and are referenced in the issue.

[pep8speaks]

Hello @alexander-ponomaroff! Thanks for submitting the PR.

• There are no PEP8 issues in the file pandas/core/accessor.py !

• There are no PEP8 issues in the file pandas/core/groupby/groupby.py !

• There are no PEP8 issues in the file pandas/core/resample.py !

• There are no PEP8 issues in the file pandas/core/window.py !

[datapythonista]

lgtm, thanks @alexander-ponomaroff

can you merge master to rerun the CI please

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #24132 into master will decrease coverage by 49.18%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #24132       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    92.2%   43.02%   -49.19%     
===========================================
  Files         162      162               
  Lines       51701    51701               
===========================================
- Hits        47671    22244    -25427     
- Misses       4030    29457    +25427

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	?
#single	43.02% <ø> (ø)	⬆️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/core/window.py	28.93% <ø> (-67.47%)	⬇️
pandas/core/accessor.py	63.85% <ø> (-34.94%)	⬇️
pandas/core/groupby/groupby.py	25.03% <ø> (-71.48%)	⬇️
pandas/core/resample.py	23.36% <ø> (-73.63%)	⬇️
pandas/io/formats/latex.py	0% <0%> (-100%)	⬇️
pandas/core/categorical.py	0% <0%> (-100%)	⬇️
pandas/io/sas/sas_constants.py	0% <0%> (-100%)	⬇️
pandas/tseries/plotting.py	0% <0%> (-100%)	⬇️
pandas/tseries/converter.py	0% <0%> (-100%)	⬇️
pandas/io/formats/html.py	0% <0%> (-98.62%)	⬇️
... and 123 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 03134cb...65ebcda. Read the comment docs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #24132 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #24132   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.22%   92.22%           
=======================================
  Files         162      162           
  Lines       51828    51828           
=======================================
  Hits        47798    47798           
  Misses       4030     4030

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	90.62% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
#single	43% <ø> (ø)	⬆️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/core/accessor.py	98.79% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/groupby/groupby.py	96.67% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/resample.py	96.58% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/window.py	96.39% <ø> (ø)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 040f06f...6a9da48. Read the comment docs.

[jreback]

can you rebase

[datapythonista]

@alexander-ponomaroff seems like you've got unrelated changes to this PR, can you take a look please

[alexander-ponomaroff]

0cfd1c2f000ad9c4cf8e7a170e85c2971a99cf02 and f74fc59793ce1f01e1afcdd29bcdf0dceccaf244 commits were added to this pull request by @jreback right? Or did I mess something up?

[datapythonista]

When we ask for a rebase, it mainly means to merge master into your branch, so you have your changes on top of the latest version. So, you should have a merge commit, but not commits from master directly or other PRs.

[alexander-ponomaroff]

@datapythonista I guess my experimentation went wrong :/. I reverted everything and merged everything properly now right?

Last night I just merged master into my branch but it failed the CI checks, so I thought I was doing something wrong and tried some experimentation, which was not a good idea.

[datapythonista]

Looks great, but the failures in the CI are because of a test that checks a docstring. Can you take a look and update the test please?

[datapythonista]

@jreback I fixed the problems in this PR, and all green now, should be ready to go.

There are still few docstrings with the wrong order, we'll be adding the validation to the CI in the follow up issue to fix them: #24280

[datapythonista]

@jreback if you have time to take a quick look at this. Should be ready to be merged, and will block #24288 soon, which will add the linting for this fix. Thanks!

[jreback]

lgtm

[datapythonista]

thanks @alexander-ponomaroff for the fixes

and thanks @jreback for the review

[alexander-ponomaroff]

@datapythonista No problem. Sorry for not fixing the failures that happened in the tests quickly, I had exams and was very busy studying for those.

[datapythonista]

No worries. Are you planning to work on moving the CircleCI build to Travis? I was thinking on taking that myself if you don't.

[alexander-ponomaroff]

@datapythonista It would be great if you could take that over. I've been struggling with how to go about moving CicleCI build to Travis and didn't want to be annoying and ask too many questions, so I haven't gotten very far when I was working on it. Then my exams took over all of my time and I had to stop working on it, so if you are ok with taking it over from now, it would be much appreciated. Sorry about this.

[datapythonista]

no worries, thanks for giving it a try, and for letting me know