fellingdateR: Estimate, report and combine felling dates of historical tree-ring series #618
Comments
|
Thanks for submitting to rOpenSci, our editors and @ropensci-review-bot will reply soon. Type |
|
🚀 The following problem was found in your submission template:
👋 |
|
@hanecakr The error was because your URL field was markdown-style: "[url](url)", and should just be plain "url". I've edited to fix; you should now be able to call |
|
@ropensci-review-bot check package |
|
Thanks, about to send the query. |
|
🚀 Editor check started 👋 |
Checks for fellingdateR (v0.0.0.9003)git hash: 05c449fb
(Checks marked with 👀 may be optionally addressed.) Package License: MIT + file LICENSE 1. Package DependenciesDetails of Package Dependency Usage (click to open)
The table below tallies all function calls to all packages ('ncalls'), both internal (r-base + recommended, along with the package itself), and external (imported and suggested packages). 'NA' values indicate packages to which no identified calls to R functions could be found. Note that these results are generated by an automated code-tagging system which may not be entirely accurate.
Click below for tallies of functions used in each package. Locations of each call within this package may be generated locally by running 's <- pkgstats::pkgstats(<path/to/repo>)', and examining the 'external_calls' table. basesub (32), rep (31), length (21), c (17), nrow (17), apply (15), matrix (15), max (14), ncol (13), data.frame (10), seq (10), which (10), range (9), for (8), paste0 (8), as.data.frame (7), attributes (7), numeric (7), as.numeric (6), by (6), drop (5), is.na (5), mean (5), min (5), list (4), summary (4), diff (3), floor (3), format (3), rownames (3), setdiff (3), sum (3), T (3), unique (3), any (2), character (2), get (2), grep (2), lapply (2), names (2), round (2), sapply (2), scale (2), seq_len (2), abs (1), all (1), as.character (1), as.integer (1), ceiling (1), colnames (1), colSums (1), complex (1), cumsum (1), dim (1), file.exists (1), gettext (1), Im (1), intersect (1), lengths (1), logical (1), match (1), merge (1), message (1), Re (1), readLines (1), regexpr (1), seq_along (1), sort (1), sqrt (1), substring (1), table (1), vapply (1) statsdf (18), spline (7), end (3), sd (2), start (2), sigma (1) ggplot2element_blank (13), element_text (5), ggplot (3), aes (2), arrow (2), geom_line (2), unit (2), geom_area (1), scale_x_continuous (1), theme (1) fellingdateRhdi (7), sw_model (6), sw_data_overview (3), d.count (2), d.dens (2), fd_report (2), sw_interval (2), strip.comment (1), sw_combine_plot (1) utilsdata (13), citation (1), tail (1) grDevicespdf (7) dplyrleft_join (1), mutate (1), pull (1), relocate (1), select (1), summarize (1) ggtextelement_markdown (3) dplRrwl.stats (2) graphicstitle (2) plyrround_any (2) tidyrpivot_longer (2) MASSfitdistr (1) 2. Statistical PropertiesThis package features some noteworthy statistical properties which may need to be clarified by a handling editor prior to progressing. Details of statistical properties (click to open)
The package has:
Statistical properties of package structure as distributional percentiles in relation to all current CRAN packages
All parameters are explained as tooltips in the locally-rendered HTML version of this report generated by the The final measure (
2a. Network visualisationClick to see the interactive network visualisation of calls between objects in package 3.
|
| id | name | conclusion | sha | run_number | date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6932735657 | pkgcheck | success | 05c449 | 5 | 2023-11-20 |
| 6932735666 | R-CMD-check | success | 05c449 | 9 | 2023-11-20 |
| 6932735656 | test-coverage | success | 05c449 | 12 | 2023-11-20 |
3b. goodpractice results
R CMD check with rcmdcheck
R CMD check generated the following note:
- checking data for non-ASCII characters ... NOTE
Note: found 11 marked UTF-8 strings
R CMD check generated the following check_fails:
- cyclocomp
- rcmdcheck_non_ascii_characters_in_data
Test coverage with covr
Package coverage: 77.6
Cyclocomplexity with cyclocomp
The following functions have cyclocomplexity >= 15:
| function | cyclocomplexity |
|---|---|
| read_fh | 150 |
| fd_report | 42 |
| sw_sum | 32 |
| cor_table | 31 |
| sw_combine | 27 |
| sw_interval | 17 |
| movAv | 16 |
| sw_combine_plot | 15 |
Static code analyses with lintr
lintr found the following 170 potential issues:
| message | number of times |
|---|---|
| Avoid 1:length(...) expressions, use seq_len. | 6 |
| Avoid library() and require() calls in packages | 1 |
| Avoid using sapply, consider vapply instead, that's type safe | 2 |
| Lines should not be more than 80 characters. | 154 |
| Use <-, not =, for assignment. | 7 |
4. Other Checks
Details of other checks (click to open)
✖️ The following 3 function names are duplicated in other packages:
-
get_headerfrom eventr
-
hdifrom bayestestR, ggdist, hdi, HDInterval
-
movAvfrom berryFunctions
Package Versions
| package | version |
|---|---|
| pkgstats | 0.1.3.9 |
| pkgcheck | 0.1.2.11 |
Editor-in-Chief Instructions:
This package is in top shape and may be passed on to a handling editor
|
@hanecakr Thank you for the submission. All looks good to me. Will pass on the handling editor momentarily. |
|
@ropensci-review-bot assign @maelle as editor |
|
Assigned! @maelle is now the editor |
|
Thanks for your submission @hanecakr! I have some comments before I can proceed with the reviewer search. 🌳 Happy to discuss the comments below! 😸 Editor checks:
Editor commentsInstallation instructionsFor brevity you can keep only the installation instructions with pak. DependenciesI wonder whether the dependency on plyr for very few functions could be avoided? MetadataI don't think it's allowed to have backticks in a DESCRIPTION file, I see some in the Description field. Or if it's allowed, at least it's unusual? DocsI'd recommend creating a pkgdown website. DataI see the example datasets are saved as internal datasets however you use them in the documentation (in the README) so why not make them exported datasets? https://r-pkgs.org/data.html#sec-data-data Rather than using the names with "dummy" I'd recommend informative names. (Beside, some might consider "dummy" to be an offensive word related to ableism). #### Tests I see some top-level code in for instance https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/master/tests/testthat/test-fd_report.R I'd recommend instead having a function defined in a helper file like test_data <- function() {
data.frame(series = c("aaa", "bbb", "ccc", "no_last", "no_sapwood"),
n_sapwood = c(10, 11, 12, 10, NA),
waneyedge = c(FALSE, FALSE, TRUE, FALSE, FALSE),
last = c(123, 456, 1789, NA, 1978))
}that you'd then call from each test (not each test file) to create the data. Even better, it could have a more informative name. For more context: https://blog.r-hub.io/2020/11/18/testthat-utility-belt/#code-called-in-your-tests and https://r-pkgs.org/testing-advanced.html#sec-testing-advanced-fixture-helper I think some test lines could be more condensed, e.g. https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/tests/testthat/test-fd_report.R#L105 could go on the previous line, and https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/tests/testthat/test-fd_report.R#L96-L98 or https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/tests/testthat/test-fd_report.R#L120-L122 might be a single line, to see more of the test file at once on the screen? You shouldn't namespace For Why is there a test that is commented out? https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/tests/testthat/test-sw_interval.R#L2 (as opposed to, say, completely removed) Instead of the regular expressions for testing errors, you might be interested in this approach of classed errors: https://www.mm218.dev/posts/2023-11-07-classed-errors/ CodePlease read the output from lintr in the automatic checks above, and fix accordingly (or update this thread to explain why you disagree). Lines such as https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/R/cor_table.R#L117 should use if (!inherits(x, "rwl")) {In for instance would be Same comments as for test files, I think there could be fewer new lines in scripts such as https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/master/R/cor_table.R, to facilitate reading / vertical scrolling. I guess this conflicts a bit with the huge indentations in the files (which you are obviously allowed to prefer!). For the else if in https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/R/sw_interval.R#L236, why not use the In https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/R/sw_interval_plot.R#L137 what warnings are suppressed? In the same post mentioned previously https://www.mm218.dev/posts/2023-11-07-classed-errors/, it's shown that one can selectively suppress warnings of a given class. |
|
Thanks a lot @maelle for this first round of comments. Will try to tackle most of these issues in the next few days. |
|
Dear @maelle. I've been working on the package and think I'm able now to address most of your comments. I'll list the answers to your comments here: Installation instructionsFor brevity you can keep only the installation instructions with pak.
DependenciesI wonder whether the dependency on plyr for very few functions could be avoided?
MetadataI don't think it's allowed to have backticks in a DESCRIPTION file, I see some in the Description field. Or if it's allowed, at least it's unusual?
DocsI'd recommend creating a pkgdown website.
DataI see the example datasets are saved as internal datasets however you use them in the documentation (in the README) so why not make them exported datasets? https://r-pkgs.org/data.html#sec-data-data
Rather than using the names with "dummy" I'd recommend informative names. (Beside, some might consider "dummy" to be an offensive word related to ableism).
TestsI see some top-level code in for instance https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/master/tests/testthat/test-fd_report.R I'd recommend instead having a function defined in a helper file like tests/testthat/helper-testdata
I think some test lines could be more condensed, e.g. ...
You shouldn't namespace fellingdateR::: data in test files.
For test-sw_combine_plot.R you might want to look into snapshot testing rather than using ggplot2's internal data structure: https://testthat.r-lib.org/articles/snapshotting.html#whole-file-snapshotting (other relevant source: https://www.tidyverse.org/blog/2022/09/playing-on-the-same-team-as-your-dependecy/#testing-testing)
Why is there a test that is commented out? https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/tests/testthat/test-sw_interval.R#L2 (as opposed to, say, completely removed)
Instead of the regular expressions for testing errors, you might be interested in this approach of classed errors: https://www.mm218.dev/posts/2023-11-07-classed-errors/ CodePlease read the output from lintr in the automatic checks above, and fix accordingly (or update this thread to explain why you disagree). Lines such as https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/R/cor_table.R#L117 should use inherits()
In for instance cor_table.R, I think the code might be more readable with explaining variables. For instance
Same comments as for test files, I think there could be fewer new lines in scripts such as https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/master/R/cor_table.R, to facilitate reading / vertical scrolling. I guess this conflicts a bit with the huge indentations in the files (which you are obviously allowed to prefer!).
For the else if in https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/R/sw_interval.R#L236, why not use the switch() function? I must confess I like using it but have to look up the docs every time to remember how to input the arguments. But it'll decrease the complexity of the current logic.
In https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR/blob/05c449fb13b678ac1700177d73a20fad6c55da8c/R/sw_interval_plot.R#L137 what warnings are suppressed? In the same post mentioned previously https://www.mm218.dev/posts/2023-11-07-classed-errors/, it's shown that one can selectively suppress warnings of a given class.
Warning: Removed 52 rows containing non-finite values ( I'm sure there are more elegant and effective ways to improve the scripts, functions and their documentation, but I hope that these initial revisions have elevated the quality of the package sufficiently, making it amenable for the review process. Of course, I'm open for additional insights and recommendations to further improved the quality and performance of the package. -- Kristof |
|
Thanks a ton @hanecakr! A small note, in GitHub Markdown if you type In the README when mentioning the reference index, you could rephrase the link so as not to use "here" (https://webaccess.berkeley.edu/ask-pecan/click-here), for instance "You can find the [list of functions]".
Ok, but in that case would it work to not load sysdata (which might look confusing) but instead use
There's already a lot of stuff to do before submission! Don't hesitate to ask if you need help with snapshot testing, but it's maybe not useful here anyway. A small non compulsory thing, I see your default branch is named master, you could change it to the new community standard "main" using the usethis function for instance. See also https://www.tidyverse.org/blog/2021/10/renaming-default-branch/ Another Git thing, your repository contains the .Rproj.user folder, should it be removed and added to .gitignore? See https://usethis.r-lib.org/reference/git_vaccinate.html for a handy way to gitignore it globally.
Fair enough! Happy to try and make a PR if you change your mind (maybe this time I'd remember how to use it straight away 😂 ) I'll now look for reviewers! Thanks again for all your work! |
|
@ropensci-review-bot seeking reviewers |
|
Please add this badge to the README of your package repository: [](https://github.com/ropensci/software-review/issues/618)Furthermore, if your package does not have a NEWS.md file yet, please create one to capture the changes made during the review process. See https://devguide.ropensci.org/releasing.html#news |
|
@maelle Thanks a lot! |
|
@ropensci-review-bot add @njtierney to reviewers |
|
@njtierney added to the reviewers list. Review due date is 2023-12-22. Thanks @njtierney for accepting to review! Please refer to our reviewer guide. rOpenSci’s community is our best asset. We aim for reviews to be open, non-adversarial, and focused on improving software quality. Be respectful and kind! See our reviewers guide and code of conduct for more. |
|
@njtierney: If you haven't done so, please fill this form for us to update our reviewers records. |
|
Thank you @njtierney for accepting to review this package! |
|
@njtierney: with a little delay, I decided to follow the advice of @maelle and moved the example datasets from internal to external data, so they become easily available for testing and examples, both for end-uses as during code review. The latest commit implements the necessary (small) changes. Looking forward to your comments and suggestions. -- Kristof. |
|
Thanks, team! I've got a few deadlines this week but will take a look next week and aim to have this done by the 22nd. |
|
Thank you @njtierney and good luck with the deadlines! |
|
@ropensci-review-bot add @ajpelu to reviewers |
|
@ajpelu added to the reviewers list. Review due date is 2023-12-30. Thanks @ajpelu for accepting to review! Please refer to our reviewer guide. rOpenSci’s community is our best asset. We aim for reviews to be open, non-adversarial, and focused on improving software quality. Be respectful and kind! See our reviewers guide and code of conduct for more. |
|
👋 @hanecakr, any update? 😸 |
|
Dear Maëlle,
I very sorry for the horrible delay in my response to the review reports. Especially given the timely reports of the reviewers.
Every year, jan-feb are months at work where most of my time is consumed by strickt deadlines.
But in a week or two, sky’s look bright again 😉 and I will start working on the review!
have a nice day,
Kristof.
Kristof Haneca
Erfgoedonderzoeker | dendrochronoloog
Agentschap Onroerend Erfgoed
M +32 (0)474 44 81 96
***@***.***<https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7719-8305> ***@***.*** <https://twitter.com/KristofHaneca> ***@***.*** <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kristof_Haneca>
From: Maëlle Salmon ***@***.***>
Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 7:54 AM
To: ropensci/software-review ***@***.***>
Cc: Haneca Kristof ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***>
Subject: Re: [ropensci/software-review] fellingdateR: Estimate, report and combine felling dates of historical tree-ring series (Issue #618)
👋 @hanecakr<https://github.com/hanecakr>, any update? 😸
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#618 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABYHJXJO4KYPMYSIAYQKB5DYSXBXZAVCNFSM6AAAAAA7THBDQWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSMZVGQYTSNZTGA>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.******@***.***>>
|
|
Thanks for the update @hanecakr, and good luck with the deadlines! |
|
Again a big thank you @njtierney for your review report and time. Package ReviewPlease check off boxes as applicable, and elaborate in comments below.
DocumentationThe package includes all the following forms of documentation:
The opening paragraphs of the README are good, and I think that this R
Then, describe the problem you want to solve, which I think is Then show a short example of the output, clearly demonstrating the The rest of the first paragraph:
Is important, but I think could go into more of a methods/general I'm not sure what the images show me, and so to communicate this I think the target audience could be more clearly stated in the README.
All installed well for me!
It did run successfully locally!
The examples ran without error, using:
There are no community guidelines in the README, I see them in the file:
Functionality
All tests pass - unit tests seem quite good coverage, evaluated using
Estimated hours spent reviewing: 5
Review CommentsI wanted to open by saying that while I have a lot of feedback, I think General commentsThere are a fair few examples from the rOpenSci packaging
Input checkingI would recommend writing small helpers for input checking, and Into: And that code could look like this: Similarly, Could be written as a function: Admittedly, I do have a strong preference for writing these types of Are a great idea, and there are a few notable places where that would
cor_table.RRefactoring And so on indicate to me that these could be written up as separate Examples should demonstrate all types of the inputs for the function
data.RI would recommend standardising the dataset names to be all lowercase,
fd_report.RI think that Similar to Could be rewritten as
get_header.RThis function should move the I think you could use Although I think that they are functionally the same, so feel free to
hdiThis function uses
movAvI think this starting chunk would be clearer if only The stop error can move to the top of this, so we clearly capture if I suggest using another explaining variable inside As that Similarly, the pattern,
read_fh.R
I have found that moving comments either into documentation or into Tidying up the error messages in this function would make some of these This is a pretty massive function, a bit over 1200 lines of code. I
sw_combin_plot.RThis is the first time I've seen
I've not seen this pattern to avoid R CMD Check notes before My tactic has always been to have a separate definition of these, as When I run devtools::check() I get
I am all for using the new base R pipe
This comment should probably live in a github issue or just be removed:
sw_combine.RThis error should check each of the conditions separately - either it
sw_data_info.RI think these error messages would benefit from using sw_data_overview.RThis is a nice function to include to facilitate data discovery sw_interval_plot.RThis code Could be rewritten as an error function or the condition in sw_interval.RIn the final line of documentation for this function there is a hanging
sw_model.RGreat to see input checking at the top of the function - I do think Helper function
sw_sum_plot.Rindentation in this code is not consistent - recommend applying a style Examples should show different variations possible for function
sw_sum.RSee note above on including plots. tests
_Originally posted by @njtierney in |
|
Dear @ajpelu. You comments and suggestions in your review report have been most helpfull to improve the package. Thank you for your time investment! Package ReviewPlease check off boxes as applicable, and elaborate in comments
DocumentationThe package includes all the following forms of documentation:
I think the target audience of the pkg would be indicated more The images are not very illustrative of what the package does, they
In the installation instructions, it might be more effective to Why does the author prefer to use the package pak rather than devtools
The vignette outlines the primary functions but lacks a There are missing citations in the vignette. Please add a reference
In the vignette of the website it appears: but when I run locally i got: Please consider change the three
No community guidelines found, only in DESCRIPTION there is a
Functionality
All test pass. The coverage is 77.44 % (using
Estimated hours spent reviewing: 13
Review CommentsThank you for your contribution with the fellingdateR package. It Given my expertise and interest in dendrochronology, I thoroughly This being my first software review for Ropensci, I apologize for any General comments
CoveragePlease consider review the test coverage of the movAv.R function
GoodpracticesAfter run the ✖ write short and simple functions. These functions have high
✖ use '<-' for assignment instead of '='. '<-' is the standard, and
✖ avoid long code lines, it is bad for readability. Also, many people
✖ avoid sapply(), it is not type safe. It might return a vector, or a
✖ avoid 1:length(...), 1:nrow(...), 1:ncol(...), 1:NROW(...) and
✖ fix this R CMD check NOTE: Note: found 11 marked UTF-8 strings ✖ avoid 'T' and 'F', as they are just variables which are set to the
|
|
It was suggested to rename the package to |
|
I have a first draft of a paper ["paper/paper.md"] that I want to submit to JOSS if/when I manage to address all issues raised in the review proces. Can this paper remain a .md file under the |
|
@hanecakr thank you! In your answer, it is hard for me to see what is quoted from the reviews, and what is your answer. Could you please consistently use quote formatting |
|
@hanecakr Regarding renaming, you're in luck, @njtierney wrote a post on this very topic years ago: https://www.njtierney.com/post/2017/10/27/change-pkg-name/ (linked from the dev guide) |
|
Hi @hanecakr Thanks for your message. I have seen your changes, and for me it is fine. If you need help to improve the pkg, please let me know. We may want to collaborate on future versions of the package, as this topic (i.e. combining dendrochronology and R) is in line with my research interests. Also if you need any help with the manuscript, let me know. @maelle Thanks for the opportunity to review this pkg. It was an inspiring experience. |
@maelle: Thanks for the link to @njtierney 's blog. Meanwhile I also got some help from @koenedaele and the package/repository has been renamed to |
|
@hanecakr thank you! I'd have recommended the opposite (quotes using the quote syntax, your comments as is) but whatever works! @ajpelu thank you! Could you please post your answer with the reviewer's approval template? @njtierney could you please have a look at the answer to your review? Thanks all for all your work 🙏 |
Reviewer Response@hanecakr Thanks for your message. I have seen your changes, and for me it is fine. If you need help to improve the pkg, please let me know. We may want to collaborate on future versions of the package, as this topic (i.e. combining dendrochronology and R) is in line with my research interests. Also if you need any help with the manuscript, let me know. @maelle Thanks for the opportunity to review this pkg. It was an inspiring experience. Final approval (post-review)
Estimated hours spent reviewing: 13 h |
|
@njtierney could you please have a look at the answer to your review? Please use the reviewer's approval template. |
Reviewer ResponseThanks for the responses, @hanecakr! You have done a great job addressing these comments. Thank you so much for taking the time to implement these. Well done! I've got a couple of minor comments below but I think this is all good to go from my perspective. Formatting these reviews can be a bit tricky, but I did find it hard to know which parts you were responding to - in particular the documentation parts. This could have been resolved by placing my entire review in block quotes and then you responding either in further nested block quotes ( READMEThe README looks to be updated substantially, thank you for taking the time to do this! One minor quirk I noticed with the README is:
I'm not sure what to make of the I also really appreciate the new workflow diagram, that is very nice! package renameWell done on renaming the package! One small quip - you still have the RStudio project named Using
|
|
@njtierney thanks!! |
|
@ropensci-review-bot approve fellingdater |
|
Approved! Thanks @hanecakr for submitting and @njtierney, @ajpelu for your reviews! 😁 To-dos:
Should you want to acknowledge your reviewers in your package DESCRIPTION, you can do so by making them Welcome aboard! We'd love to host a post about your package - either a short introduction to it with an example for a technical audience or a longer post with some narrative about its development or something you learned, and an example of its use for a broader readership. If you are interested, consult the blog guide, and tag @ropensci/blog-editors in your reply. They will get in touch about timing and can answer any questions. We maintain an online book with our best practice and tips, this chapter starts the 3d section that's about guidance for after onboarding (with advice on releases, package marketing, GitHub grooming); the guide also feature CRAN gotchas. Please tell us what could be improved. Last but not least, you can volunteer as a reviewer via filling a short form. |
|
@hanecakr thanks so much for your work on your package! @ajpelu @njtierney thanks a ton again for reviewing! |
|
Dear @maelle , @ajpelu and @njtierney thank you so much for all your time and effort you´ve invested in reviewing my package 🙏🙏🙏. It was a first for me and learned a lot. Thanks to you the quality of the package improved significantly! |
|
@ropensci-review-bot finalize transfer of fellingdater |
|
Transfer completed. |
|
@maelle, the transfer to rOpenSci's repo succeeded! 🚀 |
|
Awesome, great to read! No need to list me, your participation in the process is thanks enough. Thank you for all your work and your kind words! |
Date accepted: 2024-04-08
Submitting Author Name: Kristof Haneca
Submitting Author Github Handle: @hanecakr
Other Package Authors Github handles: (comma separated, delete if none)
Repository: https://github.com/hanecakr/fellingdateR
Version submitted:
Submission type: Standard
Editor: @maelle
Reviewers: @njtierney, @ajpelu
Archive: TBD
Version accepted: TBD
Language: en
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):
The package aims to facilitate and standardize the computation of felling dates from dated tree-ring series. It covers all steps of processing measured ring-width series from raw data to the reporting of felling date estimates, for single series and for groups of related tree-ring series.
Maily professional tree-ring scientists (dendrochronologists) that work on historical timbers and wooden objects (archaeology, architectural history, sculptures, panel paintings, etc.)
No, no other R-packages do the same job.
yes
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.
Explain reasons for any
pkgcheckitems which your package is unable to pass.All checks pass
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
Code of conduct
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: