On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:48 +0000, Benilton Carvalho wrote: > How about using: > > Enhances: Rmpi > > ? > > b The main reason is that "enhances" seems a peculiar way to describe the relation between a package that (optionally) uses a piece of infrastructure and the infrastructure. Similarly, I would not say that a car enhances metal. The example given in the R extension documentation ("e.g., by providing methods for classes from these packages") seems more in line with the usual meaning of enhance.
A secondary reason is that I can not tell from the documentation exactly what putting a package in enhances does. The example of adding functionality to a class suggests that packages that are enhanced are required. However, clearly one could surround code that enhanced a class from another package with a conditional, so that if the code was skipped if the enhanced package was absent. Even that logic isn't quite right if the enhanced package is added later. My package only loads/verifies the presence of rmpi if one attempts to use the distributed features, so the relation is at run time, not load time. Ross > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:00 AM, Ross Boylan <r...@biostat.ucsf.edu> wrote: > > I have a package that can use rmpi, but works fine without it. None of > > the automatic test code invokes rmpi functionality. (One test file > > illustrates how to use it, but has quit() as its first command.) > > > > What's the best way to handle this? In particular, what is the > > appropriate form for upload to CRAN? > > > > When I omitted rmpi from the DESCRITPION file R CMD check gave > > <quote> > > * checking R code for possible problems ... NOTE > > alldone: no visible global function definition for ‘mpi.bcast.Robj’ > > alldone: no visible global function definition for ‘mpi.exit’ > > <quote> > > followed by many more warnings. > > > > When I add > > Suggests: Rmpi > > in DESCRIPTION the check stops if the package is not installed: > > <quote> > > * checking package dependencies ... ERROR > > Packages required but not available: > > Rmpi > > </quote> > > Rmpi is not required, but I gather from previous discussion on this list > > that suggests basically means required for R CMD check. > > > > NAMESPACE seems to raise similar issues; I don't see any mechanism for > > optional imports. Also, I have not used namespaces, and am not eager to > > destabilize things so close to release. At least, I hope I'm close to > > release :) > > > > Thanks for any advice. > > > > Ross Boylan > > > > P.S. Thanks, Duncan, for your recent advice on my help format problem > > with R 2.7. I removed the nested \description, and now things look OK. > > > > ______________________________________________ > > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > > ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel