Added metadataframe.py which has MetaDataframe class.  This class stores...
... a dataframe and attempts to overload all operators and promote dataframe methods to object methods in hopes that users can subclass this effectively as if it were a Dataframe itself.

Hi guys.  I'm not exactly sure what tests to run on this class.  Any help would be appreciated.  

One thing I'm worried about is that I didn't overload every attributes that DataFrame relies on.  I did most of the basic ones, and all those of the public API, but there may be more that I missed because they were inherited from NDFrame or PandasObject.

Also, I decided to to call my deserialization functions mload and mloads to avoid name conflicts with the pandas API.
 Why not MetaDataFrame instead of MetaDataframe, to be consistent with DataFrame capitalization?
 Not sure why I did this initially but will change it thanks for the heads
up.
On Jan 28, 2013 3:30 PM, "stephenwlin" notifications@github.com wrote:

> Why not MetaDataFrame instead of MetaDataframe, to be consistent with
> DataFrame capitalization?
> 
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/pydata/pandas/pull/2695#issuecomment-12802717.
 Lots of discussion (#2845) but no real concensus or champion. Users
are free to reuse this independently of it being merged into pandas.

If there are no objections, closing in 3..2..
 I will keep the metadataframe module hosted separately in my PyUvVis (https://github.com/hugadams/pyuvvis) package and continue to use it and develop it with the intention of general use cases.  I monitor the mailing list frequently so any requests for it can be directed to me:

hughesadam87@gmail.com

When I get around to writing the PyUvVis official documentation, I'll put a small writeup together on this class by itself and share.  If there ever becomes a point that merging would be desired, that is fine.
 Thank you. closing now.
