search

USGS-R / gsplot

plotting foundation for timeseries reporting
Other
6 stars 14 forks source link

Fix par bleeding #400

Closed ldecicco-USGS closed 7 years ago

ldecicco-USGS commented 7 years ago

As described in #391

So now we add a new list of original par (as defined on the loading of the package) to our gsconfig env , and add that to the custom gsconfig$options when loadConfig is called. I therefore had to change some tests.

@jread-usgs @jiwalker-usgs and/or @lindsaycarr have a look.

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling a8d4169724d4e175dc603a84e7bce9e76e804997 on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.

lindsayplatt commented 7 years ago

in the updated figs, some of the stuff looks like it's getting cutoff now

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling a82fd7fce7d74d18c73832108f1c4e8deb9a3daa on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling a82fd7fce7d74d18c73832108f1c4e8deb9a3daa on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling 4870191aff72fad2d4d066aaec3a6feefad3e760 on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.

ldecicco-USGS commented 7 years ago

I took out my changes, rebuilt the Readme, and the newly created figures (for the readme) look the same as with my changes I'm proposing here (ie...these changes aren't causing the altered figures). @lindsaycarr could you verify that your fork's readme (assuming it's current with USGS-R) produces the graphs without changes? If you don't see altered figures, could you pull this PR locally and see if you produce the same readme figures that I now?

What's weird and interesting is that the graphs I'm pushing here look fine when done in the R console...but different when created via knitr. So that may be a separate issue.

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling 9b67176716482a906201e0927b35d19383a496f0 on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.

lindsayplatt commented 7 years ago

So when I knit the README on my local version (updated with most recent upstream), none of the files changed. I pulled down your branch, and knit without building and reloading and the figures changed but back to how I would expect them to look. Then I built and reloaded and none of the figures show up in the Git tab, but they look different than I would expect them to.

ldecicco-USGS commented 7 years ago

huh? "Then I built and reloaded and none of the figures show up in the Git tab, but they look different than I would expect them to."

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling f6a2a60c126e08f85d873bde0b584a22ad0bbd20 on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling f6a2a60c126e08f85d873bde0b584a22ad0bbd20 on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.

coveralls commented 7 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.05%) to 79.523% when pulling 1a1891e0003576c52be6f507af79d6460a8ecde6 on ldecicco-USGS:master into 1d0361c5e0a54b88ffb7c78342ea29ba0632be4a on USGS-R:master.