Implement index #96
Implement index #96
Conversation
Used usethis::use_tidy_description() for standardization. Also updated R4DS to DSLC, added the pkgdown site in the URL field, and added a ".9000" while we work on this version (which will probably be at least 1.1).
Add explicit # nocov to things we won't check, try to cover as much as we can. Also refactored and repaired some tests while I was at it. The biggest change might be that I renamed the test files to match their associated R files. This makes it much easier to run tests and coverage for that single file. With proper mocking, the order of tests shouldn't matter. I also updated to testtthat 3e for snapshots. At the same time, I change the capture.output tests to snapshots.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks @jonthegeek. Looks like this one is mainly styling changes, both code, and wrapping the example code in if interactives? Is that now what CRAN accepts?
Other than general updates, the main thing I did was remove the R 3.6 thing specifically since it's way back at the point.
|
@thebioengineer Check the required workflows. They're out-of-date, so it's impossible to succeed. |
|
I implemented more testing. I want to hit 100% before I start changing things for #95, so I'll have another round of changes after work, and then the actual implementation of a slightly new system (relying more on tidytuesday to supply metadata, rather than figuring it out ourselves here; that way the structure of the tidytuesday repo can change as long as the supplied metadata still works for this package). |
|
@thebioengineer Let's get this one merged! It can't currently pass checks, because GitHub is looking for actions that no longer exist. Can you update the branch protection rules to remove these:
And then (re)add these:
I don't think we should put the other, more-specific checks into the "required" bucket. It's good for us to get alerts if those fail, but we don't need to block PRs when they do, IMO. |
wouldn't that just be removing/updating the actions, not branch protection? TBH, the code for the actions is pretty old, so could probably use a wiping/reset |
|
The "required" notes are ones that you have set in branch protection. I already updated the actions in this PR, but I can't do that last step. |
Refactor to make CRAN happier and to add 100% test coverage.
Closes #94.