Timeline for At which part of the paper is it better to cite R packages?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 19, 2015 at 5:00 | comment | added | Fomite | @Ilya Yet you could obtain the figure using base graphics - a scatter plot is a scatter plot. | |
| Sep 18, 2015 at 9:38 | comment | added | ikashnitsky |
@Fomite No)) The idea is to cite everything that is needed for reproducibility. You cannot obtain the figure you use in the paper without ggplot2, but you can easily reproduce the analysis without Git
|
|
| Sep 18, 2015 at 3:27 | comment | added | Fomite | @Ilya Except this will rapidly become cumbersome. Do I cite Git? matplotlib? Numpy, because I really like their CSV export function? Requests, because its how I pull down a config file off Github to make sure I'm always using the current one? | |
| Sep 17, 2015 at 9:16 | comment | added | ikashnitsky | @Fomite I don't agree. It is crucial to pay credit to those who contributed their time helping others. Also, I think, you should mention all the packages used for reproducibility. | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 22:23 | comment | added | Fomite | @Ilya Honestly, I don't think I would, unless there was something fundamental about ggplot2 that enabled the analysis. | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 21:48 | comment | added | ikashnitsky | How would you cite ggplot2? | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 21:37 | vote | accept | ikashnitsky | ||
| Sep 12, 2015 at 21:28 | history | answered | jakebeal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |