Last updated: 2019-05-17

Checks: 2 0

Knit directory: transcriptome_cll/

This reproducible R Markdown analysis was created with workflowr (version 1.3.0). The Checks tab describes the reproducibility checks that were applied when the results were created. The Past versions tab lists the development history.

R Markdown file: up-to-date

Great! Since the R Markdown file has been committed to the Git repository, you know the exact version of the code that produced these results.

Repository version: 51fa522

Great! You are using Git for version control. Tracking code development and connecting the code version to the results is critical for reproducibility. The version displayed above was the version of the Git repository at the time these results were generated.

Note that you need to be careful to ensure that all relevant files for the analysis have been committed to Git prior to generating the results (you can use wflow_publish or wflow_git_commit). workflowr only checks the R Markdown file, but you know if there are other scripts or data files that it depends on. Below is the status of the Git repository when the results were generated: 


Ignored files:
    Ignored:    .Rhistory

Untracked files:
    Untracked:  data/c2.cp.kegg.v6.0.symbols.gmt
    Untracked:  data/ddsrnaCLL_150218.RData
    Untracked:  docs/figure/
    Untracked:  output/diff_genes/
    Untracked:  output/diff_meth.rds
    Untracked:  output/diff_meth_IGHV.rds
    Untracked:  output/figures/

Note that any generated files, e.g. HTML, png, CSS, etc., are not included in this status report because it is ok for generated content to have uncommitted changes.

These are the previous versions of the R Markdown and HTML files. If you’ve configured a remote Git repository (see ?wflow_git_remote), click on the hyperlinks in the table below to view them.

File Version Author Date Message
html fb20e9f aluetge 2019-05-11 Build site.
Rmd c2f16a2 aluetge 2019-05-11 Start workflowr project.

What license are you using for your code? See choosealicense.com for help deciding. It’s a convention to save a file LICENSE in the root of your Git repo that contains the license text.

What license are you using for the written content on your site? It is traditional to choose a Creative Commons license for this type of content.

How should others cite your work? It’s a convention to save a file CITATION in the root of your Git repo that contains the citation information.