review package - Githubissues

mpadge commented 3 years ago

Submitting Author: Mark Padgham (@mpadge) Repository: https://github.com/mpadge/srr-demo Version submitted: 0.0.0.9000 Editor: !--editor-->@mpadge@noamross<!--end-reviewers-list--

Due date for @noamross: 2021-05-20

Archive: TBD Version accepted: TBD

Paste the full DESCRIPTION file inside a code block below:

This package does nothing

General Information

Who is the target audience and what are scientific applications of this package?
Paste your responses to our General Standard G1.1 here, describing whether your software is:
- The first implementation of a novel algorithm; or
- The first implementation within R of an algorithm which has previously been implemented in other languages or contexts; or
- An improvement on other implementations of similar algorithms in R.
Please include hyperlinked references to all other relevant software.
(If applicable) Does your package comply with our guidance around Ethics, Data Privacy and Human Subjects Research?

Technical checks

Confirm each of the following by checking the box.

[ ] I/we have read the guide for authors and rOpenSci packaging guide.
[ ] I/we have read the Statistical Software Peer Review Guide for Authors.
[ ] I/we have run autotest checks on the package, and ensured no tests fail.
[ ] The srr_stats_pre_submit() function confirms this package may be submitted.

This package:

[ ] does not violate the Terms of Service of any service it interacts with.
[ ] has a CRAN and OSI accepted license.
[ ] contains a README with instructions for installing the development version.

Publication options

[ ] Do you intend for this package to go on CRAN?
[ ] Do you intend for this package to go on Bioconductor?

Code of conduct

[ ] I agree to abide by rOpenSci's Code of Conduct during the review process and in maintaining my package should it be accepted.

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot help

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

Hello @mpadge, here are the things you can ask me to do:


# List all available commands
@ropensci-review-bot help

# Show our Code of Conduct
@ropensci-review-bot code of conduct

# Switch to "seeking reviewers"
@ropensci-review-bot seeking reviewers

# Approve the package
@ropensci-review-bot approve

# Add a user to this issue's reviewers list
@ropensci-review-bot add xxxxx to reviewers

# Remove a user from the reviewers list
@ropensci-review-bot remove xxxxx from reviewers

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@ropensci-review-bot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@ropensci-review-bot remove editor

# Close the issue
@ropensci-review-bot approve

# Close the issue
@ropensci-review-bot out of scope

# Various package checks
@ropensci-review-bot check package

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot check package

mpadge commented 3 years ago

Checks for demo (v0.0.0.9000)

git hash: 1e2f8c99

:heavy_check_mark: Package uses 'roxygen2'
:heavy_multiplication_x: Package does not have a 'contributing.md' file
:heavy_check_mark: All functions have examples
:heavy_check_mark: Package 'DESCRIPTION' has a URL field
:heavy_multiplication_x: Package 'DESCRIPTION' does not have a BugReports field
:heavy_multiplication_x: Package has no continuous integration checks

Important: All failing checks above must be addressed prior to proceeding

Package License: GPL-3

Details

Click to see

### Package Statistics

click to see

--- 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 | 4| 23.3| | |files_vignettes | 0| 0.0|TRUE | |files_tests | 2| 64.1| | |loc_R | 10| 0.4|TRUE | |loc_tests | 6| 4.2|TRUE | |loc_per_fn_r | 3| 2.3|TRUE | |loc_per_fn_r_not_exp | 3| 4.0|TRUE | |loc_per_fn_src | 4| 1.8|TRUE | |loc_per_fn_r | 3| 2.3|TRUE | |loc_per_fn_r_not_exp | 3| 4.0|TRUE | |loc_per_fn_src | 4| 1.8|TRUE | |fn_call_network_size | 1| 0.3|TRUE | ---

### Network visualisation [Click here](http://kirby.ecohealthalliance.org:22051/assets/srr-demo_pkgstats1e2f8c99.html) for interactive network visualisation of calls between objects in package. **Continuous Integration Badges** (There do not appear to be any) ### goodpractice results ### R CMD check R CMD check generated the following check_fail: 1. description_bugreports ### Test Coverage Package: 0 The following files are not completely covered by tests: file | coverage --- | --- R/test.R | 0% src/cpptest.cpp | 0%

srr

This package is in the following category: Regression and Supervised Learning

:heavy_check_mark: This package is ready to submit!

Click here to view output of 'srr_report', which can be re-generated locally by running the `srr_report() function from within a local clone of the repository.

Editor-in-Chief Instructions:

Processing may not proceed until the items marked with :heavy_multiplication_x: have been resolved.

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot goodtoreview

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

Thanks, about to check whether the package is review-ready

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

:rocket:

Note This package features some noteworthy statistical properties, as detailed in the 'details' section at the top of this issue. Reasons for the features flagged in that section as noteworthy should be clarified by a handling editor prior to progressing.

Handling Editor Instructions:

Please address the above noteworthy statistical properties prior to assigning reviewers.

:wave:

noamross commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot assign @mpadge as editor

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

Assigned! @mpadge is now the editor

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot add @noamross to reviewers

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

@noamross added to the reviewers list. Review due date is 2021-05-20. Thanks @noamross for accepting to review! Please refer to our reviewer guide.

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot help

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

Hello @mpadge, here are the things you can ask me to do:


# List all available commands
@ropensci-review-bot help

# Show our Code of Conduct
@ropensci-review-bot code of conduct

# Switch to "seeking reviewers"
@ropensci-review-bot seeking reviewers

# Approve the package
@ropensci-review-bot approve

# Add a user to this issue's reviewers list
@ropensci-review-bot add xxxxx to reviewers

# Remove a user from the reviewers list
@ropensci-review-bot remove xxxxx from reviewers

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@ropensci-review-bot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@ropensci-review-bot remove editor

# Close the issue
@ropensci-review-bot approve

# Close the issue
@ropensci-review-bot out of scope

# Check whether a package is good to send out to review
@ropensci-review-bot goodtoreview

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot check package

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot goodtoreview

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

Thanks, about to check whether the package is review-ready

ropensci-review-bot commented 3 years ago

:rocket:

Package Statistics

Since the previous statistics were generated, the repository has been updated to: git hash: 77dfe392

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	4	23.3
files_vignettes	0	0.0	TRUE
files_tests	2	64.1
loc_R	10	0.4	TRUE
loc_tests	6	4.2	TRUE
loc_per_fn_r	3	2.3	TRUE
loc_per_fn_r_not_exp	3	4.0	TRUE
loc_per_fn_src	4	1.8	TRUE
loc_per_fn_r	3	2.3	TRUE
loc_per_fn_r_not_exp	3	4.0	TRUE
loc_per_fn_src	4	1.8	TRUE
fn_call_network_size	1	0.3	TRUE

Note This package features some noteworthy statistical properties, as detailed immediately above. Reasons for the features flagged in that section as noteworthy should be clarified by a handling editor prior to progressing.

Handling Editor Instructions:

Please address the above noteworthy statistical properties prior to assigning reviewers.

:wave:

mpadge commented 3 years ago

@ropensci-review-bot check package

ropenscilabs / statistical-software-review

review package #6

General Information

Technical checks

Publication options

Code of conduct

Checks for demo (v0.0.0.9000)

Details

srr

Editor-in-Chief Instructions:

Handling Editor Instructions:

Package Statistics

Handling Editor Instructions: