Closes #1839 dummy function created

[kiwi5104679]

Thank you for your Pull Request! We have developed this task checklist from the Development Process Guide to help with the final steps of the process. Completing the below tasks helps to ensure our reviewers can maximize their time on your code as well as making sure the admiral codebase remains robust and consistent.

Please check off each taskbox as an acknowledgment that you completed the task or check off that it is not relevant to your Pull Request. This checklist is part of the Github Action workflows and the Pull Request will not be merged into the main branch until you have checked off each task.

• Place Closes DUMMY ISSUE FOR ONBOARDING #1839 into the beginning of your Pull Request Title (Use Edit button in top-right if you need to update)
• Code is formatted according to the tidyverse style guide. Run styler::style_file() to style R and Rmd files
• Updated relevant unit tests or have written new unit tests, which should consider realistic data scenarios and edge cases, e.g. empty datasets, errors, boundary cases etc. - See Unit Test Guide
• If you removed/replaced any function and/or function parameters, did you fully follow the deprecation guidance?
• Review the Cheat Sheet. Make any required updates to it by editing the file inst/cheatsheet/admiral_cheatsheet.pptx and re-upload a PDF and a PNG version of it to the same folder. (The PNG version can be created by taking a screenshot of the PDF version.)
• Update to all relevant roxygen headers and examples, including keywords and families. Refer to the categorization of functions to tag appropriate keyword/family.
• Run devtools::document() so all .Rd files in the man folder and the NAMESPACE file in the project root are updated appropriately
• Address any updates needed for vignettes and/or templates
• Update NEWS.md under the header # admiral (development version) if the changes pertain to a user-facing function (i.e. it has an @export tag) or documentation aimed at users (rather than developers). A Developer Notes section is available in NEWS.md for tracking developer-facing issues.
• Build admiral site pkgdown::build_site() and check that all affected examples are displayed correctly and that all new functions occur on the "Reference" page.
• Address or fix all lintr warnings and errors - lintr::lint_package()
• Run R CMD check locally and address all errors and warnings - devtools::check()
• Link the issue in the Development Section on the right hand side.
• Address all merge conflicts and resolve appropriately
• Pat yourself on the back for a job well done! Much love to your accomplishment!

[github-actions]

Package	Line Rate	Health
admiral	97%	✔
Summary	97% (4940 / 5102)	✔

[manciniedoardo]

Hi @kiwi5104679 - as discussed by email, you noted that your pkgbuild is failing:

I suggest setting @leywords and @family to an already existing category, e.g. @ other_advanced. Try see if that fixes your CMD check as well.

[kiwi5104679]

Hi @manciniedoardo , @AndersAskeland
I corrected @Keyword and @family to other_advanced and updated documents.
But I could not executed pkgdown::build_site() and devtools::check().
I found what is wrong, but I just can't do it.......

Could you take a look again?

[kiwi5104679]

Hi @AndersAskeland , @manciniedoardo

I could run pkgdown::build_site() and devtools::check()!!
The problem seemed to be caused by my environment of Rstudio.

I checked examples are displayed correctly and a new function occurs.
But the appearance of the page is a little different from actual site.

Have you seen such a situation?

[manciniedoardo]

Hi @AndersAskeland , @manciniedoardo

I could run pkgdown::build_site() and devtools::check()!! The problem seemed to be caused by my environment of Rstudio.

I checked examples are displayed correctly and a new function occurs. But the appearance of the page is a little different from actual site.

Have you seen such a situation?

Probably fine for all intents and purposes in this exercise - well done!

[AndersAskeland]

@kiwi5104679 The Note you are seeing is due to you having some top-level (data-backup) files that are not "supported". Actually, the only files allowed by default are defined here.

When you have non-standard files, one way to avoid this "note" would be to define them in your .Rbuildignore.

However, as @manciniedoardo said, for the extent of this exercise it does not matter. Everything else looks good, so I am going to close this pull-request - Great work! Looking forward to seeing your contributions on admiralmetabolic :)

[kiwi5104679]

@AndersAskeland , @manciniedoardo
Thank you for checking. Got it.
Thanks to your supports, I managed to close this issue.
I may ask for support on a non-dummy issue, but thanks in advance!