Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Missing link to package at https://www.rformassspectrometry.org/contributions/ #18

Open
tobiasko opened this issue Feb 24, 2023 · 18 comments
Assignees

Comments

@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator

https://www.rformassspectrometry.org

does not mention this package at all. There is also no link to your name in the contribution section @cpanse. This should really change!

@cpanse
Copy link
Collaborator

cpanse commented Feb 24, 2023

I guess , a pull request would solve it

@cpanse
Copy link
Collaborator

cpanse commented Feb 24, 2023

@cpanse cpanse closed this as completed Feb 24, 2023
@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The task is completed once your name shows up on the homepage! ;-)

@tobiasko tobiasko reopened this Feb 24, 2023
@jorainer
Copy link
Collaborator

Note: we put only developers and packages on the RforMassSpectrometry homepage that are on the RforMassSpectrometry github repo. We maintain and are responsible for all these packages for which we also have full control. Contributors listed on the "Contributors" page have provided code to these packages.

That being said, I think it would be maybe good to have a separate section/page with outside contributors and packages that are not part of RforMassSpectrometry, but that implement/extend/support that. IMHO that would be even better than adding your package to the RforMassSpec repo. Any thoughts on that?

@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tobiasko commented Mar 1, 2023

I also think that adding the package to the RforMassSpec repo would be the easier solution. @cpanse?

@cpanse
Copy link
Collaborator

cpanse commented Mar 1, 2023

@jorainer great; fine with us. let me handle the current pull request and than we can transfer it. What do I need to do?

@lgatto
Copy link
Collaborator

lgatto commented Mar 1, 2023

Wait a second. Adding a package to R4MS isn't only a matter of transferring to the Github organisation.

@jorainer
Copy link
Collaborator

jorainer commented Mar 1, 2023

IMHO there is no need to transfer the package to RforMassSpectrometry - I think it's perfectly fine to have it in your repo. There is no need that all packages that extend e.g. Spectra (or MsBackend) need to be at RforMassSpec.

Ideal solution for me:

  • you maintain your package and keep it at fgcz
  • you make a PR to the Spectra vignette adding your backend (there is a section listing additional backends).
  • ideally, your package should be added to Bioconductor, so it would be hosted there and it would be easily findable by users.

Transferring the package to RforMassSpectrometry would also mean that we would need to take over (at least part) of the maintainance duties - and that's something I simply can not do. There are also other packages around providing MsBackend backends, not hosted or maintained by us (e.g. MsBackendMS or MsBackendSirius)

@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tobiasko commented Mar 1, 2023

Has the wind just turned 180 degrees? 😄

@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tobiasko commented Mar 1, 2023

IMHO: It would be good to get listed here, but I fear the overall effect on package findability will be limited. A direct link on the homepage to all currently available backends could really help to guide potential users that are looking for a specific support. Maybe ordered by data formats?

@jorainer
Copy link
Collaborator

jorainer commented Mar 1, 2023

Has the wind just turned 180 degrees?

no? we never proposed to move the package to R4MS - and as explained, I don't think that's necessary (and actually good). It's more efficient to have independently maintained packages.

IMHO: It would be good to get listed here

yes, that's exactly what I meant with in the Spectra vignette above. Please make a PR to that vignette adding a link to your package. And yes, we have to find a better way to list backends (from R4MS and external ones). Whether the R4MS homepage is the correct place I don't know (also because we're not regularly updating that). Maybe the best place would be the Spectra package/repo, since the backend concept is only important for that package.

@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tobiasko commented Mar 1, 2023

ahhh, ok! Sorry. I guess my eyes skipped the than in your comment. I basically picked up: it would be even better adding your package to the RforMassSpec repo.

@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tobiasko commented Mar 1, 2023

ok. So our action item is Please make a PR to that vignette adding a link to your package. @cpanse Would you do that?

@tobiasko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tobiasko commented Mar 1, 2023

I guess this should be the file to edit:

https://github.com/RforMassSpectrometry/Spectra/blob/HEAD/vignettes/Spectra.Rmd

@jorainer
Copy link
Collaborator

jorainer commented Mar 2, 2023

Exactly. In this file there is a section Backends (to the end of the file) that lists already some other backends. Please add a link to yours too, ideally also with a short description what it provides and which data it can handle.

@cpanse
Copy link
Collaborator

cpanse commented Mar 2, 2023

@jorainer @lgatto @tobiasko rformassspectrometry/Spectra@e1dcac4 I hope you like it. Otherwise, please feel free to change it.

@jorainer
Copy link
Collaborator

jorainer commented Mar 7, 2023

Thanks! Better you change it - I asked for some changes in your PR :)

@cpanse
Copy link
Collaborator

cpanse commented Mar 10, 2023

@tobiasko https://bioconductor.org/packages/devel/bioc/vignettes/Spectra/inst/doc/Spectra.html#4_Backends

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants