Get R check passing

[ablack3]

Actually I think I still have a few things to do still.

• Please add \value to .Rd files regarding exported methods and explain
  the functions results in the documentation. Please write about the
  structure of the output (class) and also what the output means. (If a
  function does not return a value, please document that too, e.g.
  \value{No return value, called for side effects} or similar)
  Missing Rd-tags in up to 39 .Rd files, e.g.:
  age.Rd: \value
  atLeast.Rd: \value
  atMost.Rd: \value
  attrition.Rd: \value
  censoringEvents.Rd: \value
  ...
  All functions need @return tags.

• \dontrun{} should only be used if the example really cannot be executed
  (e.g. because of missing additional software, missing API keys, ...) by
  the user. That's why wrapping examples in \dontrun{} adds the comment
  ("# Not run:") as a warning for the user. Does not seem always
  necessary. Please replace \dontrun with \donttest.

• Please unwrap the examples if they are executable in < 5 sec, or replace
  dontrun{} with \donttest{}.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: +0.21 🎉

Comparison is base (486605b) 72.80% compared to head (c31d3e3) 73.02%.

❗ Current head c31d3e3 differs from pull request most recent head 999e692. Consider uploading reports for the commit 999e692 to get more accurate results

📣 This organization is not using Codecov’s GitHub App Integration. We recommend you install it so Codecov can continue to function properly for your repositories. Learn more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main       #9      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.80%   73.02%   +0.21%     
==========================================
  Files          11       11              
  Lines         923      923              
==========================================
+ Hits          672      674       +2     
+ Misses        251      249       -2     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
R/attributes-concept.R	65.90% <ø> (ø)
R/attributes-nested.R	30.00% <ø> (ø)
R/collectCodesetId.R	87.96% <ø> (ø)
R/criteria.R	62.65% <ø> (ø)
R/exit.R	84.44% <ø> (ø)
R/query.R	63.15% <ø> (ø)
R/cohort.R	77.57% <100.00%> (+2.09%)	⬆️
R/conceptSet.R	70.00% <100.00%> (-0.12%)	⬇️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[mdlavallee92]

This looks fine. Going to pull this into the main OdyOSG.

In the future this should be the process either:

• Commit to OdyOSG/Capr main -> PR OdyOSG main to ohdsi/Capr develop
• Branch on ohdsi/Capr PR to develop

I will take care of all the package maintenance with the site and what not when the PR is going to ohdsi/Capr main. Dont do it downstream because it ends up having to be redone anyways.

Thanks for your help! Let me know how much more effort is needed for the documentation examples