On 17.05.2012 16:52, Brian G. Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 16:32 +0200, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Yes: R CMD check does the trick. See Writing R Extension and read
about a package's test directory. I prefer frameworks that do not
obfuscate failing test results on the CRAN check farm (as most other
frameworks I have seen).
Uwe: I don't think that's completely fair. RUnit and testthat tests
can be configured to be called from the R package tests directory, so
that they are run during R CMD check.
They don't *need* to be configured that way, so perhaps that's what
you're talking about.
I am talking about the problem that relevant output of test failures
that may help to identify the problem is frequently not shown in the
output of R CMD check when such frameworks are used - that is a major
nuisance for CRAN automatisms.
If additional configuration steps are required, fine, but then package
maintainers seem to forget about that step. We do not have the time to
tell hundreds of package maintainers how to configure their preferred
test framework (whatever it is).
Best,
Uwe
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
