scoringutils 1.2.0 release

[nikosbosse]

This PR

• introduces a small change that makes check_forecasts() and score() pipeable
• updates documentation (fixes Update documentation #294)
• increments the package number to a minor release

[seabbs]

This is looking nice (no comment about jamming so many things in one PR...). I particularly like the updates to the getting started vignette.

Left a few comments with some suggested changes and spotted a couple of minor issues.

[seabbs]

Give me a ping if need a help closing this out!

[nikosbosse]

Should be ready for another review (modulo some linting errors that I still want to fix later)

[seabbs]

Can you ping me when ready for a review please.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #299 (7b7b1e8) into main (5f8f12a) will increase coverage by 0.09%.
The diff coverage is 88.37%.

❗ Current head 7b7b1e8 differs from pull request most recent head 55a15df. Consider uploading reports for the commit 55a15df to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #299      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.78%   90.87%   +0.09%     
==========================================
  Files          22       22              
  Lines        1378     1392      +14     
==========================================
+ Hits         1251     1265      +14     
  Misses        127      127              

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
R/pairwise-comparisons.R	87.50% <20.00%> (ø)
R/plot.R	97.54% <80.00%> (ø)
R/check_forecasts.R	87.82% <100.00%> (+0.21%)	⬆️
R/metrics_point_forecasts.R	73.68% <100.00%> (-1.32%)	⬇️
R/score.R	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
R/utils.R	91.89% <100.00%> (+1.12%)	⬆️
R/utils_data_handling.R	92.75% <100.00%> (+0.21%)	⬆️

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[nikosbosse]

ping ping, ready for review. There are some open linting issues which I left open for now as addressing them would likely generate more merge conflicts with #305

[seabbs]

so would #305 then become 1.2.1? Or should this wait for that to be merged?

[nikosbosse]

I would have thought to merge #305 first and then merge this one and make it a release

[seabbs]

Looks mostly good to me. I think this needs to wait for #305 to be merged before it is (so we can check linting issues are resolved and because the README will need another refresh when that happens).

Main pain points are confusion about the new is method (is it a method or is it a normal function) and the versioning of changes in this release seem confused.

[seabbs]

I've rebased on main, written a little release note, and fixed the remaining linting issues. As far as I am aware this is good to go.

[nikosbosse]

The release note is very nice, thanks so much!