New package: BarBay v0.0.1

[JuliaRegistrator]

• Registering package: BarBay
• Repository: https://github.com/mrazomej/BarBay.jl
• Created by: @mrazomej
• Version: v0.0.1
• Commit: b707c33fbeb074415c4fe0839a18abd79e01b134
• Reviewed by: @mrazomej
• Reference: mrazomej/BarBay.jl@b707c33#commitcomment-129553932
• Description: Repository for the BarBay Julia package for Bayesian inference of relative fitness on barcode sequencing data.

[github-actions]

Your new package pull request met all of the guidelines for auto-merging and is scheduled to be merged when the mandatory waiting period (3 days) has elapsed.

Since you are registering a new package, please make sure that you have read the package naming guidelines: https://julialang.github.io/Pkg.jl/dev/creating-packages/#Package-naming-guidelines-1

---

If you want to prevent this pull request from being auto-merged, simply leave a comment. If you want to post a comment without blocking auto-merging, you must include the text [noblock] in your comment. You can edit blocking comments, adding [noblock] to them in order to unblock auto-merging.

[lgoettgens]

Basically the same package has been already registered only a few days ago in #92941 under the name BayesFitness.
@mrazomej can you explain the reason for the name change AFTER the registration? And why didn't you just rename the project but started a new one?
[noblock]

[mrazomej]

Yes. I must apologize for the inconvenience. My collaborators made this name change request after I had registered BayesFitness. If possible, I would like to delete BayesFitness and retain only the BarBay.jl package.

[lgoettgens]

If possible, I would like to delete BayesFitness and retain only the BarBay.jl package.

I am not sure if that is possible. Let's wait for some other opinions on that.
[noblock]

[goerz]

Since it's only been three days, it would probably be okay to either merge this PR and make another PR deleting BayesFitness. Or, just one (manual) PR that directly renames the package in General. It seems less than optimal to have this "mistake" end up blocking the name BayesFitness in General for all perpetuity.

[noblock]

[lgoettgens]

As the uuid changed between the packages, I think reverting #92941 would be the cleanest. But unfortunately I cannot find the button to start a PR reverse PR
[noblock]

[StefanKarpinski]

I've created #93308 to revert the registration of BayesFitness, but please don't take that necessarily as approval of this plan. We should discuss a bit more whether it's ok or not to delete it.

[mrazomej]

I sincerely apologize for this inconvenience. I literally got the name change request from my collaborators the day I submitted the registration for the previous package name. I never imagined it would cause such difficulties.

[goerz]

I literally got the name change request from my collaborators the day I submitted the registration for the previous package name.

Wouldn't that have given you the three-day waiting period to block the merge?

But in any case, I see no reason not to merge #93308 (but I don't have merge permissions myself)

Just next time, make sure you're on the same page with your collaborators before registering a package. ;-)

[noblock]

[mrazomej]

This situation shows how much of a novice I am in all this stuff. I googled how to change the name, and I understood it already had to be registered to do so. I didn't even think about trying to revert the other submission.

Lesson learned. And thanks for your help and patience.

[lgoettgens]

[noblock] I changed all my comments above to be non-blocking.

[mrazomej]

Dear Julia team,

Could you let me know if my situation has been updated? I submitted a publication that has this BarBay.jl as part of the paper output, so it would be nice if I could tell the readers they can easily install the package.

Thank you so much in advance for your help, and I apologize again for the complication.

[goerz]

[noblock] Looks like #93308 has been merged, so this PR here can now proceed, right?

Every comment will have to be edited to contain [noblock]

[goerz]

[noblock] Or just ask @StefanKarpinski to merge manually, since he has a blocking comment anyway

[mrazomej]

@StefanKarpinski, I'm sorry to bother you with this situation again. @goerz mentioned I should ask you to merge the package manually. This package accompanies a publication I recently submitted for peer review, so it would be great if the reviewers could access the package as easily as possible.

I don't know if this was done. But today, I tried installing BarBay by simply typing

] add BarBay

and it says the package is not registered.

[mrazomej]

@lgoettgens @goerz @StefanKarpinski, sorry to be insistent, but as I mentioned earlier, this package is part of a publication I submitted for peer review. Therefore, please help me register the package.

Thanks in advance for your help.

[goerz]

I asked on Slack for someone with the appropriate permissions to merge this 🤞