Open jdhoffa opened 8 months ago
@AlexAxthelm recently in mentioned (in Teams?) the idea creating a new R package that centralizes/generalizes the writing of a manifest file. That's kinda the opposite of what's being proposed here @jdhoffa?
@AlexAxthelm recently in mentioned (in Teams?) the idea creating a new R package that centralizes/generalizes the writing of a manifest file. That's kinda the opposite of what's being proposed here @jdhoffa?
I would say alternative, not necessarily opposite. My main idea when writing this issue was that pacta.data.preparation
should remain focused on reading/ writing/ manipulating data, and not focus on what the workflow.*
repos are doing.
One way to do that, would be to migrate write_manifest
and things like that directly into the relevant workflow.*
repo.
Another way of achieving it is developing an R package that exclusively worries about it, e.g. pacta.workflow.utils
I tend to also prefer the pacta.worfklow.utils
approach as it ensures the code is DRY, while also keeping each package focused on it's main purpose.
Still haven't quite wrapped my head around distinguishing R packages by not dealing with file i/o versus context
It is very much related to all the file I/O specifics, tracking versions/ file hashes, etc., and not particularly relevant to the whole "typical functions that read and write data".
Just a thought, but not a hill I am going to die on 😂
_Originally posted by @jdhoffa in https://github.com/RMI-PACTA/pacta.data.preparation/pull/342#discussion_r1502689838_