move geo functionality

[ngiangre]

To make this package leaner and to its purpose, we should consider moving the geo functionality to a different package like its own since it does an amazing task on its own!

[AndrewC160]

This could be doable; I could put things into a new package which we provide as a dependency, or we could scrap it entirely. At least one of the examples in the vignette requires this, however.

[ngiangre]

I think we can leave the geo functionality in a branch and then the main could be without it. The ‘geo’ branch could be for developing it further for integration later. But depends how much work we want to do lol the geo functionality is not exactly doing a ‘purpose’ like romopomics does. Romopomics would be so much better with the geo functionality, not really vice versa. Make sense?

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 8:11 PM Andrew Clugston ***@***.***> wrote: This could be doable; I could put things into a new package which we provide as a dependency, or we could scrap it entirely. At least one of the examples in the vignette requires this, however. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#24 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB3TDSYDGBI7F6PV54LJ5DLS255KLANCNFSM4VRL7HEA> .

-- Cheers, *Nick Giangreco* Columbia University Systems Biology Ph.D. Student 716.713.2124