🚀 Open Call for rOpenSci Champions Program 2023 Applications!

✨ Looking for Champions and Mentors

📅 Before Monday, Sep 4, 2023

🔗 Learn more: https://ropensci.org/champions/

#rstats #rladies #ROpenSci

Today I started my day at 7.00 with meetings and email chats with people from around the world talking about the #rOpenSci champions program.

I just finished a meeting with Denisse Fierro Arcos, an Ecuadorian scientist who I met through R-Ladies and who now works in Australia with Antarctic data using SCAR and rOpenSci packages.

We talked about the Multilingual Publishing project.

It is so cool to meet again with talented people and to have the opportunity to work together. 🤩 🌎

@rOpenSci Technical Debt base on User Roles at #rOpenSci

Now at #neverworkintheory
Shurui Zhou is presenting Understanding the sustainability challenges for building open-source scientific software.

An example from the Python world mentions two types of contributors: the SE expert and the domain expert, and how the conflict between these groups comes from different mindsets.

Wondering n the #RStats world and #rOpenSci 🙂

RT @jp_hydro
Yep! Also, did you know that we have a template #targets pipeline to help you grab data from the #waterqualityportal?

https://github.com/USGS-R/ds-pipelines-targets-example-wqp/

#rstats #ropensci #reproducibility https://twitter.com/D_Blodgett/status/1638360119921500161

Updated post from the other platform last week:

🚨breaking news🚨 as of today the {foieGras} R 📦 will be known as {aniMotum}. This coincides with our just-accepted paper in MEE (more soon).

Changes coming:
GitHub: https://github.com/ianjonsen/aniMotum

R-universe: https://ianjonsen.r-universe.dev/ui#package:aniMotum

An older version, {foieGras} 0.7-6, has just been archived by CRAN and will not be supported any more.

News on our MEE {aniMotum}paper to follow soon.

#RStats #ROpenSci

@tanho This reminds me of the #rOpenSci review process for new packages. The rOpenSci review process is really tedious and typically frustrating. It can take about half a year for review process. Yes, the result is good and clean, but one should really build up a stamina to even think about submitting their package to rOpenSci. In general I like rOpenSci, but I think they adopting this strategy would lower the barrier ti entry and would make them more inclusive toward creative packages.

@koalha definitely a big issue, and why organisations that coordinate software curation and maintenance (like #ROpenSci), or collaborative efforts between entities (governments, universities...) like #SCOSS, are so important.
I'm hoping to design some sort of "Open Source Software selection guidelines" for our university's Library, so we can be more confident about the tools we train in and recommend to the community.
#openResearch

@stragu

Regarding the rOpenSci, the qcode package is "Experimental":
https://docs.ropensci.org/qcoder/

I haven't yet used any packages from #rOpenSci and I haven't submitted anything there either, but I have been following them (esp. drake) for the past year and their ideology seems nice. So it would be also nice to contribute something to rOpenSci as well 😅

Which one of there two (RQDA vs. qcoder) in your line of work need more attention? I can try to explore it during weekend.