Closed DominiqueMakowski closed 3 years ago
Yes, why not?
What should we set as minimal versions for deps?
What do you mean? R or pkgs?
For pkgs, do We submit report after right this round of updates with the highest easystats thresholds?
Does it matter?
not really 😅
Alright now that parameters is in, should we try a first submission?
bump
bump
If you can wait for a couple of weeks, I can add support for a few robust tests from WRS2
.
If you can wait for a couple of weeks
Haha finally some actual reason to justify my delay
I think it would be wise to submit report
to CRAN
as part of this release cycle.
I can work on adding support for non-parametric and robust methods in later releases.
Better not to risk losing a good package name...
Yes I think we can go ahead now with that since the other packages have been updated
We fixed the following comments:
- [x] Please omit the redundant "in R" from the title.
- [x] Please add \value to .Rd files regarding exported methods and explain
the functions results in the documentation. Please write about the
structure of the output (class) and also what the output means. (If a
function does not return a value, please document that too, e.g.
\value{No return value, called for side effects} or similar)
Missing Rd-tags:
cite_easystats.Rd: \arguments, \value
report.data.frame.Rd: \value
- [x] Some code lines in examples are commented out in
report.test_performance.Rd.
Please never do that. Ideally find toy examples that can be regularly
executed and checked. Lengthy examples (> 5 sec), can be wrapped in
\donttest.
- [x] Please always make sure to reset to user's options(), working directory
or par() after you changed it in examples and vignettes and demos.
e.g.:
old <- options(digits = 3)
...
options(old)
------------
However, we didn't replace the 3 instances of \dontrun as they wrap around brms models, which are currently causing various building problems (especially on windows distributions), causing checks and testing to fail. We hope that it's okay!
- [ ] \dontrun{} should only be used if the example really cannot be executed
(e.g. because of missing additional software, missing API keys, ...) by
the user. That's why wrapping examples in \dontrun{} adds the comment
('# Not run:') as a warning for the user.
Does not seem necessary.
- [ ] Please unwrap the examples if they are executable in < 5 sec, or replace
\dontrun{} with \donttest{}.
Thanks, on its way to CRAN.
🎉
yay!
Best is this one here: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/report/news/news.html
lmao 🤣
Holy cow, you did it! 🤯🎉🍾
Yeah Im quite surprised myself haha it thought the "report on cran" question was going to stay around forever as a running gag 😅
Are you planning to write a blog post, or should I just expect to see fireworks in Singapore from here 😅
Haha! "Look to ~my coming~ the fireworks on the first light of the fifth day, at dawn look to the east" *epic rohirrim music starts*
I'm actually leaning towards keeping this release low-key so that we have time to slowly fix some of the issues and bugs... Otherwise I'm worried that we'll be flooded à-la-check_model and that the amount of bugs will seem insurmountable...
...But it could be because I'm under the cooldown time after using the cran-release power (like all dungeons n dragons wizards 🧙♂️)... I must recover my mana before being able to commit again 🙃
But joke and personal cooldown aside yes, we should prolly advertise it :)
I think keeping it low-key is a good idea. Maybe we can spread it amongst friends and coworkers and get their response, make some fixes, and then advertise the next (more stable) release...
It currently passes tests. Should we finally push it to CRAN to facilitate installing? What should we set as minimal versions for deps?