New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
create housekeeping command called ietoolkit #124
Comments
Hi @kbjarkefur , I am the one who first suggested it. Thanks for recognizing. |
ok, I will see if @luizaandrade have any objections to this, but otherwise I will create a branch and make the update to iefolder but then send that file to you so you can make the commit and get contirbution credit as soon as it has merged to the master branch. It is easier that I do the update and send it to you as iefolder.ado is a beast... |
That would be nice, as I still can't completely understand .ado file yet. One thing I would like to comment is that, the codes currently confirming whether certain user-written commands exist (cap which ....) are executed before running One way we can solve is that, we can verify & install packages AFTER running global_setup.do file, thus STATA will install missing packages only after it searches custom ado-paths. Another way is just leave it as it is. It is because even if STATA installs packages that are missing in default path but exist in custom ado-paths, STATA will always execute commands in the custom path first, because " |
I think it should be left as it is. It is good if it is installed even if it is not needed. Imagine someone who is less advanced Stata user that works in a project with someone like you who sets up custom paths sees a command used in that project, then goes to a different project and gets an error with exactly the same code. That would be confusing. It is true that it could be small differences as custom paths guarantees the exact same version, but any version is better than no version. |
This sounds great, @kbjarkefur and @eatorange! Please go ahead with the update to iefolder. |
The locals in the command ietoolkit.ado must be updated with each publication as well now
I think the I think this is a cool usage of it. Where you can force an update of the package if the version installed is too old.
But I think we should keeps Min's method in Master Do-file created by iefolder. I made it so it is a local of commands and it loops through all of them and check that they are installed. If version of ietoolkit is very important, then the code snippet above can be used afterwards or something. |
…ed ietoolkit Updates to "iefolder" command - project master do-file, which the command creates, will install packages only if those packages are NOT installed in the system Co-Authored-By: Kristoffer Bjärkefur <kbjarkefur@users.noreply.github.com>
iefolder : fix issue #124 - adds a part in iefolder that goes well with the new command ietoolkit
Issue #124 i- create ietoolkit command and edit iefolder so that master dofiles take advantage of this command
will close issue when update is published on SSC |
Published |
Team-Lupe has a nice addition to make sure that calls to SSC to install user-written commands are only done if needed, see https://github.com/worldbank/AFG-TUP/commit/62471a78d7fdfac049500fa49cc52755642aa01d. I like this approach. We should perhaps make it standard in the master do-file iefolder creates.
But as in the case of ietoolkit they cannot use the name ietoolkit as there is no command with that name. Should we create a command that does just do stuff like outputting which version of ietoolkit is installed? the command
which
does something similar, but strangely they do not store it in a local or something.Creating the command should be straightforward.
We should let whoever was the first to do this in Team-Lupe to make the edit to iefolder if we end up using it so he or she get contributions credits. I can prepare the code and send it so this should take no time. @eatorange, who was the first to suggest this in Team-Lupe?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: