mark padgham

@ropensci-review-bot assign @emitanaka as editor

@n-kall Please note that @emitanaka will act as editor for your submission, but she will be away until early June. You'll have to wait until then before things proceed further....

Hi @n-kall, please accept apologies once again for long delays here. All of our editors are volunteers, and sometimes the world gets in the way. We're doing our best to...

Thanks for getting back to us @aourednik. The failed checks are because your package needs to be tested, as described in https://devguide.ropensci.org/pkg_building.html#testing, and the links included there. It is generally...

Ah, I think that the issue needs to be open for the bot to respond. Responses to your concerns: - The check for continuous integration is indeed confusing, and shall...

@ropensci-review-bot check package

@aourednik Those checks show some concrete next steps. Specifically, code coverage is failing, both in [your repo actions](https://github.com/aourednik/SPARQLchunks/actions/workflows/test-coverage.yaml) and on the report above. You can click in the bot report...

@emilio-berti Any updates on addressing the issues flagged above?

@emilio-berti I'm going to close this issue now due to lack of response. If you are interested in proceeding, feel free to re-open at any stage to continue the conversion....

@ropensci-review-bot assign @rkillick as editor