Closed marydeniserobertson closed 6 years ago
Evaluation
Topic | Excellent | Satisfactory | Needs Work |
---|---|---|---|
Coding style | x | ||
Coding strategy | x | ||
Presentation | x | ||
Achievement, creativity | x | ||
Ease of access | x |
Remarks:
Topic | Excellent | Satisfactory | Needs Work |
---|---|---|---|
Coding style | x | ||
Coding strategy | x | ||
Presentation | x | ||
Achievement, creativity | x | ||
Ease of access | x |
Remarks:
Topic | Excellent | Satisfactory | Needs Work |
---|---|---|---|
Coding style | x | ||
Coding strategy | x | ||
Presentation | x | ||
Achievement, creativity | x | ||
Ease of access | x |
Remarks:
I included my reflection in the assignment but now I see this is the correct place for it:
Description of how I edited README: I went to the class page on github, made a fork to my account, cloned the fork to my Rstudio, read the markdown guide, wrote my intro, made two commits, and then generated this pull request.
Reflection on process: Figuring out how to open the git file through Rstudio was tricky(the fork, clone part of the workflow). I originally thought we had to use the shell the way we did when first making repos and committing changes when testing out our software configuration. Once I found the step by step instructions for cloning it into Rstudio, it was pretty straightforward. R Markdown was very straightforward - the linked 'mastering markdown' tutorial on Github was really useful. Remembering to commit, then pull, push was also a learning curve, but having the step by step checklist for the workflow is very helpful.