jonkeane commented on code in PR #41403:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/41403#discussion_r1582198354
##########
dev/tasks/tasks.yml:
##########
@@ -888,12 +888,12 @@ tasks:
-
r-lib__libarrow__bin__darwin-arm64-openssl-3.0__arrow-{no_rc_r_version}\.zip
-
r-lib__libarrow__bin__darwin-x86_64-openssl-1.1__arrow-{no_rc_r_version}\.zip
-
r-lib__libarrow__bin__darwin-x86_64-openssl-3.0__arrow-{no_rc_r_version}\.zip
+ - r-pkg__bin__windows__contrib__4.4__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.zip
- r-pkg__bin__windows__contrib__4.3__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.zip
- - r-pkg__bin__windows__contrib__4.2__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.zip
- -
r-pkg__bin__macosx__big-sur-x86_64__contrib__4.3__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.tgz
- - r-pkg__bin__macosx__contrib__4.2__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.tgz
+ -
r-pkg__bin__macosx__big-sur-x86_64__contrib__4.4__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.tgz
+ - r-pkg__bin__macosx__contrib__4.3__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.tgz
+ -
r-pkg__bin__macosx__big-sur-arm64__contrib__4.4__arrow_{no_rc_r_version}\.tgz
Review Comment:
I don't think we've had a discussion about if we should _also_ keep binaries
for older versions of R. I know CRAN only distributes current and old, but we
say we support the previous four versions — should we also host binaries for
those too?
In this case it's "just" not removing 4.2 here. Not sure if it's worth going
and adding 4.1 and 4.0 too, but at this point we know that 4.2 works — do we
actually want to remove it?
cc @assignUser
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
