1. What project did you reproduce (include the link)?
-> cd2-survey
2. Does the project have the following on it's GitHub repository?
3. What did you appreciate about the project's repository?
-> The READMe and dependencies file is very nicely explained. I really liked the structure of the repository
4. Do you have any suggestions for improvement to the repository?
-> I think the data and code files were a little bit confusing and not very intuitive, so it took me some time to find where the data was
5. Did you manage to run the project successfully?
6. Where did you have to give up reproducing this repository (if applicable)?
-> The file that the repository was calling for was not included in the project
7. Did you have to go into the code?
8. If you looked at the code: what did you like?
-> It has a good and easy to read structure, I also really like how organised the repository files are
9. If you looked at the code, what would be a single line of advice you want to pass on to it's author?
-> I used to work with a lot of for loops, but now I am working a little bit more with dplyr pipes %>%. May be an idea to learn this other technique. it shortens the code considerably
10. Any final comments to the author?
-> You have put a lot of effort into writing a good repository. You just need to double check the reproducibility of the code
11. Do you think the class will benefit from a live demo of the reproduction of this project? Why/what can we learn?
-> I think showing the README and dependencies files and how you structured the repository would be beneficial