Closed llrs closed 4 years ago
Hi Lluís,
The names of the functions do not conflict with usethis
and I like the idea of having a verb in the function name. usethis
already has functions with the prefix use_tidy_*
so that's where use_bioc_*
came to to be, plus it pays homage to where the functions are based from.
As for r-lib/actions
, this PR https://github.com/r-lib/actions/pull/101 was just approved today.
Regarding explaining the differences, are you talking about adding more details to https://lcolladotor.github.io/biocthis/articles/biocthis.html#biocthis-functions-overview-1? Or the help pages for each function?
Best, Leo
Hi Leo,
I mean adding more details on the help pages of each function. I mean if I go to the help page of use_bioc_news_md
I can read "This function is very similar to usethis::use_news_md() except that it uses a template from biocthis." but that doesn't tell me what is different from the usethis template or how it is more appropiate for Bioconductor.
I don't know the advantage of using use_bioc_news_md
instead of use_news_md
. I would like to know more about the templates before deciding applying them to the packages and I cannot do it just looking to the help pages. Just my 2 cents.
Hope you are well on these days,
Lluís
Many thanks for developing this package! I've been looking for a while for a Bioconductor styler formatter.
I think it would be easier to use if instead of
use_bioc_support()
would be onlybioc_support()
and alike. It won't conflict withusethis
and will be shorter to read/understand. Alternatively it could useadd_
,add_bioc_support,
add_issue_template`...Also if you could explain better the differences between the
usethis
templates and this templates would be easier to adopt it (although having it recommended on the r-lib/actions will surely help).