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

Move preprocess_species.R to BirdFlowPipeline #206

Open
chenyangkang opened this issue Jan 19, 2025 · 1 comment
Open

Move preprocess_species.R to BirdFlowPipeline #206

chenyangkang opened this issue Jan 19, 2025 · 1 comment

Comments

@chenyangkang
Copy link

chenyangkang commented Jan 19, 2025

preprocess_species.R is used for fitting models so does not seem to be BirdFlowR's job. Consider moving preprocess_species.R to BirdFlowPipeline. The preprocess_species function is using ebirdst package and ebirdst is listed as "suggested" installation without version control.

@ethanplunkett
Copy link
Contributor

Lack of version control on ebirdst is deliberate to allow fitting any species. ebirdst/eBird 2022 only included half the species so users can choose to use ebirdst 2021 for the missing species. The North American species were all included in 2022 so this has not been very important to date. When they release 2023 data we may want to drop compatability with 2021 as it uses a different date format. See note in NEWS discussing the compatibility with both versions of ebirdst and help in get_dates() for a discussion of the different date formats.

ebirdst is in suggests rather than imports as I didn't think all users would need to run preprocess species - backing up your idea of moving it to BirdFlowPipeline.

I like the idea of rearranging things; the current organization is a product of the development history. It would be nice to keep preprocess_species() public though, so we might want to consider making BirdFlowPipeline public if we move preprocess_species() to it. #156 addresses this too, although when it was written BirdFlowPipeline was Dave's private repository so wasn't considered in the restructuring.

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

2 participants