Closed pdwaggoner closed 11 months ago
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Comparison is base (
37b48bd
) 90.74% compared to head (e7049b6
) 90.55%.:exclamation: Current head e7049b6 differs from pull request most recent head eb0af9f. Consider uploading reports for the commit eb0af9f to get more accurate results
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
All of these "fails" should be easy to override as the vignette successfully renders on my end. Let me know if something needs to be changed though. Thanks!
@IndrajeetPatil - Can you help out a little on this one? These checks keep failing, and I am not sure why. I've checked and updated obviously problematic spots. The changes I am making are pretty minimal. Any help would be appreciated!
@pdwaggoner R CMD check should be fixed now. You can take care of the lints.
@IndrajeetPatil - Thank you so much for the quick help! Seems the other issues are with dependencies re: other easystats packages. Not sure about those. Other minor things @mattansb should be able to address. Thanks!
ping @DominiqueMakowski ? Not sure who is best to review here
@mattansb will be away till (at least) November 👶 maybe @bwiernik can help have a look :)
I will take a look in the next week or so. Please feel free to ping me if I'm slow 😀
Excellent, thanks @bwiernik! Latest round of checks is running now, but everything should be fixed and ready for your review whenever you're ready.
Hi @bwiernik - just a friendly ping to review and merge, per your note. Let me know if you need anything else from me. Thanks
Hey @pdwaggoner I had a couple of minutes to look at the code part (not the explanations), and I've made some suggestions.
Overall, looks good - we can later expand with chisq.test()
s etc.
Don't forget to add the vignette to _pkgdown.yml
.
Excellent, thanks @mattansb ! Just added to _pkgdown.yml
and requested your review on that PR (#613). Let me know what's next and/or feel free to merge both!
@bwiernik or @mattansb, any thoughts here? Should be ready to merge. Let me know if anything else is needed from me. Thanks!
What about we add a disclaimer on top of this vignette "this vignette is work in progress, please make us a feedback about what features would you like to see in easystats to make power analysis easier", and then we merge, and Brenton will have a look when he can (and let's not bother Mat' at the moment unfortunately he has much more important stuff to worry about)
Great idea @DominiqueMakowski - and of course re: Mat! I hope he is safe and ok. I added the disclaimer per your suggestion in the latest edit. Feel free to merge as you're able. Thanks again.
Reading it over this morning. Thanks for your patience.
Absolutely and no worries. Not trying to bother but rather keep it from falling through the cracks. Thanks for any reviews/thoughts.
Hey @pdwaggoner I still have a few open notes on my review - once you make those changes, I think this can be merged.
Thanks @mattansb ! but I can't see anything other than your suggestion to update the yml, which I did. Did I miss something? Can you point me to where you're referencing, and I will be happy to respond accordingly. Thanks
Sure, just tagged you in them.
Sorry, just checked but still can't locate where your comments are. Is it possible we are looking at different version of the vignette? Feel free to share a direct link, due to my denseness.
Weird... If I go to https://github.com/easystats/effectsize/pull/605/files in a desktop browser, I see all the comments. Does that work?
Ok, glad to know we are doing the same thing. Yes, I did just that and don't see any comments. So sorry! Feel free to make the changes directly, or you could just list them here in the conversation, and I can make them. Your call. Thanks again for the patience and help.
Okay, I think I messed up 😅 Do you see them now?
Ah there they are! I will make those changes right now. Thanks for that. Stand by for more
Alright, @mattansb , all requested revisions have been responded to. Let me know what's next or if anything else is needed from me. Thanks again and I hope you're staying safe!
Just wondering if we can push this, given that all changes were made? Thanks @mattansb for any update on where we are with this one. Thanks!
I made some changes (the use of pwr.t.test()
in this example was not appropriate for the data at used in the example).
Once the tests pass, I'll merge.
Thanks @pdwaggoner !
Thanks @mattansb - looks like two tests are failing elsewhere, not in the vignette, unless I am misreading. Not sure if anything is needed from me or not on this...? Thanks!
Thanks again @pdwaggoner!
Absolutely! Thanks for the review and work @mattansb !
Overrides previous PR #604 to include other changes. Sorry for the confusion!