Group 4 - Pokehelperr (R)

[ritisha2000]

---

name: Pokehelperr
about: Pokemon team builder based on the resistances and weaknesses of existing team members.

Submitting Author Name: Ritisha Sharma
Submitting Author Github Handle: @ritisha2000
Other Package Authors Github handles: Jakob Thoms, Raul Aguilar, Sneha Sunil @j99thoms, @AguilarRaul, @snesunil
Repository: https://github.com/UBC-MDS/pokehelperr
Version submitted: v0.1.7
Submission type: Standard
Editor: Jakob Thoms (@j99thoms), Raul Aguilar (@AguilarRaul), Sneha Sunil (@snesunil), Ritisha Sharma (@ritisha2000)
Reviewers: Renee Kwon, Ty Andrews, Sarah Abdelazim
Archive: TBD

Archive: TBD
Version accepted: TBD
Language: en

• Paste the full DESCRIPTION file inside a code block below:

pokehelperr is a Python package designed to assist Pokémon players in building teams of pokémon. Users can provide a list of pokémon currently on their team, and pokehelperr will recommend a suitable pokémon to add to the team based on the current team's overall weaknesses and resistances.

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.):

  • data retrieval
  • data extraction
  • data munging
  • data deposition
  • data validation and testing
  • workflow automation
  • version control
  • citation management and bibliometrics
  • scientific software wrappers
  • field and lab reproducibility tools
  • database software bindings
  • geospatial data
  • text analysis

• Explain how and why the package falls under these categories (briefly, 1-2 sentences):

• Who is the target audience and what are scientific applications of this package?
  The target audience is pokemon players of all ages who would like to create a more robust team.

• Are there other R packages that accomplish the same thing? If so, how does yours differ or meet our criteria for best-in-category?
  There are websites and applications that help build pokémon teams, such as the Mariland Team Builder. However these tools simply present the player with a visual representation of their current team's weaknesses and resistances. They don't make recommendations. In other words, the existing tools simply given visual representations of the dictionaries created by calc_weaknesses and calc_resistances. There doesn't seem to be any existing R packages which will use the weaknesses/resistances data to make recommendations for additional team members.

• (If applicable) Does your package comply with our guidance around Ethics, Data Privacy and Human Subjects Research?

• 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 pkgcheck items which your package is unable to pass.

Technical checks

Confirm each of the following by checking the box.

• I have read the rOpenSci packaging guide.
• I have read the author guide and I expect to maintain this package for at least 2 years or to find a replacement.

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.
• includes documentation with examples for all functions, created with roxygen2.
• contains a vignette with examples of its essential functions and uses.
• has a test suite.
• has continuous integration, including reporting of test coverage.

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

• The package is novel and will be of interest to the broad readership of the journal.
• The manuscript describing the package is no longer than 3000 words.
• You intend to archive the code for the package in a long-term repository which meets the requirements of the journal (see MEE's Policy on Publishing Code)
• (Scope: Do consider MEE's Aims and Scope for your manuscript. We make no guarantee that your manuscript will be within MEE scope.)
• (Although not required, we strongly recommend having a full manuscript prepared when you submit here.)
• (Please do not submit your package separately to Methods in Ecology and Evolution)

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.

[missarah96]

Package Review

Please check off boxes as applicable, and elaborate in comments below. Your review is not limited to these topics, as described in the reviewer guide

• As the reviewer I confirm that there are no conflicts of interest for me to review this work (If you are unsure whether you are in conflict, please speak to your editor before starting your review).

Documentation

The package includes all the following forms of documentation:

• A statement of need clearly stating problems the software is designed to solve and its target audience in README.
• Installation instructions: for the development version of the package and any non-standard dependencies in README.
• Vignette(s) demonstrating major functionality that runs successfully locally.
• Function Documentation: for all user-facing functions.
• Examples for all user-facing functions.
• Community guidelines including contribution guidelines in the README or CONTRIBUTING.
• Metadata including author(s), author e-mail(s), a url, and any other relevant metadata e.g., in a pyproject.toml file or elsewhere.

Readme file requirements
The package meets the readme requirements below:

• Package has a README.md file in the root directory.

The README should include, from top to bottom:

• The package name
• Badges for:
  • Continuous integration and test coverage,
  • Docs building (if you have a documentation website),
  • A repostatus.org badge,
  • Python versions supported,
  • Current package version (on PyPI / Conda).

NOTE: If the README has many more badges, you might want to consider using a table for badges: see this example. Such a table should be more wide than high. (Note that the a badge for pyOpenSci peer-review will be provided upon acceptance.)

• Short description of package goals.
• Package installation instructions
• Any additional setup required to use the package (authentication tokens, etc.)
• Descriptive links to all vignettes. If the package is small, there may only be a need for one vignette which could be placed in the README.md file.
  • Brief demonstration of package usage (as it makes sense - links to vignettes could also suffice here if package description is clear)
• Link to your documentation website.
• If applicable, how the package compares to other similar packages and/or how it relates to other packages in the scientific ecosystem.
• Citation information

Usability

Reviewers are encouraged to submit suggestions (or pull requests) that will improve the usability of the package as a whole.
Package structure should follow general community best-practices. In general please consider whether:

• Package documentation is clear and easy to find and use.
• The need for the package is clear
• All functions have documentation and associated examples for use
• The package is easy to install

Functionality

• Installation: Installation succeeds as documented.
• Functionality: Any functional claims of the software been confirmed.
• Performance: Any performance claims of the software been confirmed.
• Automated tests: Tests cover essential functions of the package and a reasonable range of inputs and conditions. All tests pass on the local machine.
• Continuous Integration: Has continuous integration setup (We suggest using Github actions but any CI platform is acceptable for review)
• Packaging guidelines: The package conforms to the pyOpenSci packaging guidelines.
  A few notable highlights to look at:
  • Package supports modern versions of Python and not End of life versions.
  • Code format is standard throughout package and follows PEP 8 guidelines (CI tests for linting pass)

For packages also submitting to JOSS

• The package has an obvious research application according to JOSS's definition in their submission requirements.

Note: Be sure to check this carefully, as JOSS's submission requirements and scope differ from pyOpenSci's in terms of what types of packages are accepted.

The package contains a paper.md matching JOSS's requirements with:

• A short summary describing the high-level functionality of the software
• Authors: A list of authors with their affiliations
• A statement of need clearly stating problems the software is designed to solve and its target audience.
• References: With DOIs for all those that have one (e.g. papers, datasets, software).

Final approval (post-review)

• The author has responded to my review and made changes to my satisfaction. I recommend approving this package.

Estimated hours spent reviewing:

1 hour

Review Comments

• Wrong url link (added py package link instead of R package link) added in this package reviewing issue
• It would be nice to mention other R packages similar to your package and how your package is different
• It would be nice to add output of the examples given in the Usage section of Readme as well as code coverage percentage badge
• Would be nice to see how your package handles pokemon not listed in pokemon.csv. I do not see a test for that in the testthat script
• Code coverage is 97% which is great, however, devtools::check() produced 2 errors, 6 warnings and 3 notes, please check that

[renee-kwon]

---

Package Review

Please check off boxes as applicable, and elaborate in comments below. Your review is not limited to these topics, as described in the reviewer guide

• Briefly describe any working relationship you have (had) with the package authors.
• As the reviewer I confirm that there are no conflicts of interest for me to review this work (if you are unsure whether you are in conflict, please speak to your editor before starting your review).

Documentation

The package includes all the following forms of documentation:

• A statement of need: clearly stating problems the software is designed to solve and its target audience in README
• Installation instructions: for the development version of package and any non-standard dependencies in README
• Vignette(s): demonstrating major functionality that runs successfully locally
• Function Documentation: for all exported functions
• Examples: (that run successfully locally) for all exported functions
• Community guidelines: including contribution guidelines in the README or CONTRIBUTING, and DESCRIPTION with URL, BugReports and Maintainer (which may be autogenerated via Authors@R).

Functionality

• [] Installation: Installation succeeds as documented.
• Functionality: Any functional claims of the software been confirmed.
• Performance: Any performance claims of the software been confirmed.
• Automated tests: Unit tests cover essential functions of the package and a reasonable range of inputs and conditions. All tests pass on the local machine.
• Packaging guidelines: The package conforms to the rOpenSci packaging guidelines.

Estimated hours spent reviewing: 1 hour

• Should the author(s) deem it appropriate, I agree to be acknowledged as a package reviewer ("rev" role) in the package DESCRIPTION file.

---

Review Comments

• I was unable to install the package using devtools::install_github("../pokehelperr") as in the installation instructions and had to use `devtools::install_github("UBC-MDS/pokehelperr") in order to get it to work.
• For the weaknesses/resistances function, it could be more interpretable for users if categories (such as "resistant", "no effect", "non-resistant") were used instead of integers.
• Since the use of the functions are dependent on the two included datasets, it would be helpful if the read me included instructions on downloading them into the right folder.
• Overall, the package was very nostalgic and fun to use. I'm confident I can build a strong pokemon team with it! Gotta catch em all!

[tieandrews]

Package Review

Please check off boxes as applicable, and elaborate in comments below. Your review is not limited to these topics, as described in the reviewer guide

• Briefly describe any working relationship you have (had) with the package authors.
• As the reviewer I confirm that there are no conflicts of interest for me to review this work (if you are unsure whether you are in conflict, please speak to your editor before starting your review).

Documentation

The package includes all the following forms of documentation:

• A statement of need: clearly stating problems the software is designed to solve and its target audience in README
• Installation instructions: for the development version of package and any non-standard dependencies in README
• Vignette(s): demonstrating major functionality that runs successfully locally
• Function Documentation: for all exported functions
• Examples: (that run successfully locally) for all exported functions
• Community guidelines: including contribution guidelines in the README or CONTRIBUTING, and DESCRIPTION with URL, BugReports and Maintainer (which may be autogenerated via Authors@R).

Functionality

• Installation: Installation succeeds as documented.
• Functionality: Any functional claims of the software been confirmed.
• Performance: Any performance claims of the software been confirmed.
• Automated tests: Unit tests cover essential functions of the package and a reasonable range of inputs and conditions. All tests pass on the local machine.
• Packaging guidelines: The package conforms to the rOpenSci packaging guidelines.

Estimated hours spent reviewing: 1

• Should the author(s) deem it appropriate, I agree to be acknowledged as a package reviewer ("rev" role) in the package DESCRIPTION file.

---

Review Comments

• like the github pages docs in the repo information at the top right of the repo
• the problem is clear but perhaps the functions can be shown as examples where it answers the question of what am I trying to do when this function is useful, e.g. You want to find X.....you can get this from Y.....
• can consider including some visuals of pokemons, types etc. to help communicate the types, etc. better
• great project and now I want to go play pokemon!