Closed maelle closed 4 years ago
maelle
commented
4 years ago Should have I updated https://github.com/ropenscilabs/makeregistry/blob/master/inst/scripts/final_categories.csv instead? :cold_sweat:
No https://github.com/ropenscilabs/makeregistry/blob/cfe283a6d52131fac9fe41d97a6aa884ba8c6d6d/R/registry.R#L131 but we could store the categories.csv in makeregistry if that's used there.
sckott
commented
4 years ago Or do we want the category info to live in the package?
where would that go exactly?
Are the categories ok?
i forget where we're at on categories. are those the categories currently used in our software-review? if so, that looks good to me then
These packages without category info should be removed
agreed
Should makeregistry and roregistry be merged?
hmm, at this point this repository is mostly just commits from the bot with the built registry - so maybe it makes sense to keep roregistry as the built registry with bot commits only - and makeregistry has everything else. sound good?
Should have I updated .../final_categories.csv instead?
see above comment, yeah, lets keep all the scripts/metadata/etc in makeregistry
maelle
commented
4 years ago The categories are for https://ropensci.org/packages
maelle
commented
4 years ago Ok, will close this here and instead will update makeregistry.
Reg categories in packages that could live in DESCRIPTION as schema.org stuff but not that straightforward.
cf #28
A few questions
It seems suboptimal to update it once in a while.
Are the categories ok? data-access, data-tools, http-tools, literature, scalereprod, databases, security, data-publication, geospatial, data-visualization, image-processing, taxonomy, data-extraction, data-analysis and altmetrics.
These packages without category info should be removed from the registry in my opinion: craft, miner, rcheatsheet, roblog and umapr. I'll make a PR to makeregistry.
Should makeregistry and roregistry be merged?