ropensci-review-bot
commented
2 years ago Thanks for submitting to rOpenSci, our editors and @ropensci-review-bot will reply soon. Type @ropensci-review-bot help for help.
Closed mpadge closed 2 years ago
ropensci-review-bot
commented
2 years ago Thanks for submitting to rOpenSci, our editors and @ropensci-review-bot will reply soon. Type @ropensci-review-bot help for help.
ropensci-review-bot
commented
2 years ago git hash: 988118a5
Important: All failing checks above must be addressed prior to proceeding
Package License: MIT + file LICENSE
This package features some noteworthy statistical properties which may need to be clarified by a handling editor prior to progressing.
The package has: - code in C (87% in 14 files), C/C++ Header (3% in 3 files) and R (10% in 5 files) - 2 authors - 1 vignette - no internal data file - 1 imported package - 47 exported functions (median 27 lines of code) - no non-exported function in R (median 11 lines of code) - 94 C/C++ functions (median 27 lines of code) --- Statistical properties of package structure as distributional percentiles in relation to all current CRAN packages The following terminology is used: - `loc` = "Lines of Code" - `fn` = "function" - `exp`/`not_exp` = exported / not exported The final measure (`fn_call_network_size`) is the total number of calls between functions (in R), or more abstract relationships between code objects in other languages. Values are flagged as "noteworthy" when they lie in the upper or lower 5th percentile. |measure | value| percentile|noteworthy | |:------------------------|-----:|----------:|:----------| |files_R | 5| 29.8| | |files_src | 17| 95.7| | |files_vignettes | 1| 64.8| | |files_tests | 5| 78.5| | |loc_R | 319| 30.2| | |loc_src | 2783| 80.3| | |loc_vignettes | 182| 67.7| | |loc_tests | 416| 68.4| | |num_vignettes | 1| 60.7| | |n_fns_r | 47| 46.4| | |n_fns_r_exported | 47| 86.1| | |n_fns_r_not_exported | 0| 0.0|TRUE | |n_fns_src | 94| 94.8| | |n_fns_per_file_r | 6| 71.3| | |n_fns_per_file_src | 7| 57.3| | |num_params_per_fn | 4| 54.3| | |loc_per_fn_r | 12| 49.1| | |loc_per_fn_r_exp | 27| 60.6| | |loc_per_fn_r_not_exp | 12| 55.2| | |loc_per_fn_src | 27| 84.4| | |rel_whitespace_R | 30| 48.8| | |rel_whitespace_src | 16| 94.9| | |rel_whitespace_vignettes | 12| 69.6| | |rel_whitespace_tests | 14| 83.0| | |doclines_per_fn_exp | 38| 46.5| | |doclines_per_fn_not_exp | 0| 0.0|TRUE | |fn_call_network_size | 215| 88.2| | ---
Interactive network visualisation of calls between objects in package can be viewed by clicking here
goodpractice and other checks### 3a. Continuous Integration Badges [](https://github.com/hypertidy/geodist/actions) **GitHub Workflow Results** |name |conclusion |sha |date | |:-------------|:----------|:------|:----------| |pkgdown |success |f45a85 |2021-02-11 | |R-CMD-check |success |f45a85 |2021-02-11 | |test-coverage |success |f45a85 |2021-02-11 | --- ### 3b. `goodpractice` results ### `R CMD check` with [rcmdcheck](https://r-lib.github.io/rcmdcheck/) rcmdcheck found no errors, warnings, or notes ### Test coverage with [covr](https://covr.r-lib.org/) Package coverage: 92.38 ### Cyclocomplexity with [cyclocomp](https://github.com/MangoTheCat/cyclocomp) No functions have cyclocomplexity >= 15 ### Static code analyses with [lintr](https://github.com/jimhester/lintr) [lintr](https://github.com/jimhester/lintr) found no issues with this package!
|package |version | |:--------|:---------| |pkgstats |0.0.0.298 | |pkgcheck |0.0.1.380 |
Processing may not proceed until the items marked with :heavy_multiplication_x: have been resolved.
mpadge
commented
2 years ago @ropensci-review-bot check package
ropensci-review-bot
commented
2 years ago Thanks, about to send the query.
ropensci-review-bot
commented
2 years ago :rocket:
Editor check started
:wave:
ropensci-review-bot
commented
2 years ago git hash: 988118a5
Important: All failing checks above must be addressed prior to proceeding
Package License: MIT + file LICENSE
This package features some noteworthy statistical properties which may need to be clarified by a handling editor prior to progressing.
The package has: - code in C (87% in 14 files), C/C++ Header (3% in 3 files) and R (10% in 5 files) - 2 authors - 1 vignette - no internal data file - 1 imported package - 47 exported functions (median 27 lines of code) - no non-exported function in R (median 11 lines of code) - 94 C/C++ functions (median 27 lines of code) --- Statistical properties of package structure as distributional percentiles in relation to all current CRAN packages The following terminology is used: - `loc` = "Lines of Code" - `fn` = "function" - `exp`/`not_exp` = exported / not exported The final measure (`fn_call_network_size`) is the total number of calls between functions (in R), or more abstract relationships between code objects in other languages. Values are flagged as "noteworthy" when they lie in the upper or lower 5th percentile. |measure | value| percentile|noteworthy | |:------------------------|-----:|----------:|:----------| |files_R | 5| 29.8| | |files_src | 17| 95.7| | |files_vignettes | 1| 64.8| | |files_tests | 5| 78.5| | |loc_R | 319| 30.2| | |loc_src | 2783| 80.3| | |loc_vignettes | 182| 67.7| | |loc_tests | 416| 68.4| | |num_vignettes | 1| 60.7| | |n_fns_r | 47| 46.4| | |n_fns_r_exported | 47| 86.1| | |n_fns_r_not_exported | 0| 0.0|TRUE | |n_fns_src | 94| 94.8| | |n_fns_per_file_r | 6| 71.3| | |n_fns_per_file_src | 7| 57.3| | |num_params_per_fn | 4| 54.3| | |loc_per_fn_r | 12| 49.1| | |loc_per_fn_r_exp | 27| 60.6| | |loc_per_fn_r_not_exp | 12| 55.2| | |loc_per_fn_src | 27| 84.4| | |rel_whitespace_R | 30| 48.8| | |rel_whitespace_src | 16| 94.9| | |rel_whitespace_vignettes | 12| 69.6| | |rel_whitespace_tests | 14| 83.0| | |doclines_per_fn_exp | 38| 46.5| | |doclines_per_fn_not_exp | 0| 0.0|TRUE | |fn_call_network_size | 215| 88.2| | ---
Interactive network visualisation of calls between objects in package can be viewed by clicking here
goodpractice and other checks### 3a. Continuous Integration Badges [](https://github.com/hypertidy/geodist/actions) **GitHub Workflow Results** |name |conclusion |sha |date | |:-------------|:----------|:------|:----------| |pkgdown |success |f45a85 |2021-02-11 | |R-CMD-check |success |f45a85 |2021-02-11 | |test-coverage |success |f45a85 |2021-02-11 | --- ### 3b. `goodpractice` results ### `R CMD check` with [rcmdcheck](https://r-lib.github.io/rcmdcheck/) rcmdcheck found no errors, warnings, or notes ### Test coverage with [covr](https://covr.r-lib.org/) Package coverage: 92.38 ### Cyclocomplexity with [cyclocomp](https://github.com/MangoTheCat/cyclocomp) No functions have cyclocomplexity >= 15 ### Static code analyses with [lintr](https://github.com/jimhester/lintr) [lintr](https://github.com/jimhester/lintr) found no issues with this package!
|package |version | |:--------|:---------| |pkgstats |0.0.0.298 | |pkgcheck |0.0.1.380 |
Processing may not proceed until the items marked with :heavy_multiplication_x: have been resolved.
Submitting Author: Name (@mpadge) Repository: https://github.com/hypertidy/geodist Version submitted: 0.0.7 Submission type: Standard Editor: TBD Reviewers: TBD
Archive: TBD Version accepted: TBD
Scope
Please indicate which category or categories from our package fit policies this package falls under: (Please check an appropriate box below. If you are unsure, we suggest you make a pre-submission inquiry.):
Explain how and why the package falls under these categories (briefly, 1-2 sentences):
Who is the target audience and what are scientific applications of this package?
Are there other R packages that accomplish the same thing? If so, how does yours differ or meet our criteria for best-in-category?
(If applicable) Does your package comply with our guidance around Ethics, Data Privacy and Human Subjects Research?
If you made a pre-submission inquiry, please paste the link to the corresponding issue, forum post, or other discussion, or @tag the editor you contacted.
Technical checks
Confirm each of the following by checking the box.
This package:
Publication options
[ ] Do you intend for this package to go on CRAN?
[ ] Do you intend for this package to go on Bioconductor?
[ ] Do you wish to submit an Applications Article about your package to Methods in Ecology and Evolution? If so:
MEE Options
- [ ] The package is novel and will be of interest to the broad readership of the journal. - [ ] The manuscript describing the package is no longer than 3000 words. - [ ] You intend to archive the code for the package in a long-term repository which meets the requirements of the journal (see [MEE's Policy on Publishing Code](http://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)2041-210X/journal-resources/policy-on-publishing-code.html)) - (*Scope: Do consider MEE's [Aims and Scope](http://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)2041-210X/aims-and-scope/read-full-aims-and-scope.html) for your manuscript. We make no guarantee that your manuscript will be within MEE scope.*) - (*Although not required, we strongly recommend having a full manuscript prepared when you submit here.*) - (*Please do not submit your package separately to Methods in Ecology and Evolution*)Code of conduct