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

jsonstat package #17

Closed
zedoul opened this issue Sep 10, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

jsonstat package #17

zedoul opened this issue Sep 10, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@zedoul
Copy link

zedoul commented Sep 10, 2018

Hi,

I would like to share you that I created jsonstat package based on this implementation.

https://github.com/zedoul/jsonstat

I firstly tried to contribute instead but 1) it seems not under maintenance, 2) I thought it may take too long time to discuss like last year's one (#15) and 3) I want to implement tidyverse-like way of describing JSON-stat description not the rjstat way.

The jsonstat package supports full functionality of today's JSON-stat. And at least for now I would like to continue its maintenance.

Best regards,
Kim

@ajschumacher
Copy link
Owner

Hi!

I'm not sure why you think this package isn't under maintenance; I would describe it as stable, thanks to @hmalmedal's very good work. I also didn't see any pull requests after I encouraged you in #15.

Not a big deal though, and it is true that I personally don't think much about JSON-stat these days. Maybe your package is very cool!

I guess your package implements the idea from #15? I'll close this issue and note your package in #15 for people who would be interested.

Thanks!

@zedoul
Copy link
Author

zedoul commented Sep 11, 2018

@ajschumacher true, it is stable :'DI rather meant that rjstat has not been updated for a while. Thank you for rjstat otherwise I cannot even think of using JSON-stat. 👍

@badosa
Copy link

badosa commented Sep 11, 2018

I don't see the point of having two similar (but different) JSON-stat packages for R.

@zedoul if rjstat has not been updated for a while, doesn't it make more sense to request a pull and enriched it with the new functionality?

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

3 participants