Proactively go for feedback
Opened this issue · 13 comments
Identify repos that could benefit from {touchstone} and help them setting it up:
- tidyverse/tibble
- R data table seems to be looking for a continuous benchmarking tool and has not yet found one.
- r-lib/vctrs?
- https://github.com/dirkschumacher/ompr
oh thats' a good idea!
data.table has on open issue, should I go ahead and pitch {touchstone}? Or wait till after #95 is merged?
Let's wait for #95. And then tell them we'll contribute it to ropensci and submit to CRAN 🥳
FWIW --- I've been lurking on here awaiting your first CRAN release after which we'll probably try out using {touchstone} with {posterior} stan-dev/posterior#159. We definitely have need for it! :)
Hey @mjskay thanks for dropping stealth 😄
As you probably have seen we are getting ready to submit to ropensci and afterwards CRAN, so our API should be pretty much stable by now. I would greatly appreciate any feedback on usability and function from a third party (currently @lorenzwalthert and I are the only users of the package afaik) prior to our CRAN release.
Maybe you can give it a try once #95 is merged?
Thanks, it's good to know your intended timeline. If I have time (busy quarter atm) I'll give it a try after #95 is merged and let you know if I run into anything.
The maintainers of {greta} also seem to be keen to try this out (greta-dev/greta#365).
@lorenzwalthert I think we are now ready to go "Klinkenputzen", don't you think?
I agree yes.
https://github.com/dirkschumacher/ompr could be a candidate, also in the light of https://twitter.com/dirk_sch/status/1487039412886192128
@lorenzwalthert Ok looked into it, that is a side effect of the new optional trigger. Even if the workflow is skipped when an issue comment is created that does not contain /benchmark it still triggers the comment workflow that then has no idea whats happening and fails :D I'll open an issue and implement a fix
Thanks for the quick response.