Identify core packages about hydrology HOT 7 CLOSED

I added a few in commit 49f4b48 ... Feel free to add more if there's packages you use a lot!

from hydrology.

Added nsRFA as core and modified the buildxml.R file so it detects core packages in commit d1ac5a5

from hydrology.

Two points. The markdown based workflow we are using has I think a better method of specifying core package using this line (much like here). I think this is a cleaner place to identify core packages. I will make that change if folks are ok with that.

Second - what is our theme for core packages? Is it data packages? Is it modelling? Is it our favourite packages? By this definition:

those package that you most people would need to do hydrology in R

I wonder if data packages might be the best thing? Or modelling?

from hydrology.

I had modified the R file so we only need to modify the .md file (since there had been some additions as "core" packages which had not been reflected in the .ctv file), but I can see that this is something which can be done in the .R file since the list of core packages won't change rapidly. Happy either way - let's decide on which approach to take and we can implement accordingly.

I think core packages would be stable and reliable packages without which one can not even consider doing anything, and it is very difficult for me to pin a few of these down for the water sciences. I would give the "core" badge to packages which are well maintained and have a large user-base, for example nsRFA is used a lot in flood frequency analysis and is maintained. dataRetrieval is another one that does a lot and is widely used - but I am not a water scientist, so it is hard for me to judge.

from hydrology.

Yeah, I agree it's hard to define a 'core' package because Water Science is such a good idea. I agree with @ilapros criteria of stable + large user base, so I just chose ones that I use a lot and I think other people also use... That seems like a decent enough definition for now.

from hydrology.

Sounds good to me. Certainly it can be fluid as well. Because of regional variations in demands I wonder if we should exclude any data packages from "core". I can't think of a good reason why if we include one data package we shouldn't include them all.

from hydrology.

Agreed!

from hydrology.