A recent question on Twitter asked about what pkgs to cite in a research paper:
The thread following that question shows a lot of variation in how people cite pkg in their papers. Seems like there is a tension between conventional citation practices (cite items only relevant to research claims) vs distributing credit to software authors (cite knitr, ggplot2, etc.)
My inclination is towards to conventional citation practice in the paper (just the pkgs that make a difference to the scientific results), and machine-readable listing of all pkgs in my compendium. But it’s not always obvious where to draw the line.
So I’d love to know more about how the ropensci community are tackling this in their research and teaching!