On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Marius Hofert <marius.hof...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote: > Hi, > > I have (co-)developed two packages: 'qrmtools' and 'qrmdata'. The > latter contains data sets and is currently only available on R-Forge > (as it is larger than 5MB and thus not accepted for CRAN [although > there are much larger packages, but that's a different story...]). > 'qrmtools' contains mainly tools that show what can be done with data > such as the one contained in 'qrmdata' -- and thus has 'qrmdata' in > Suggests. The check shows 'Suggests or Enhances not in mainstream > repositories: qrmdata'; I also added 'Additional_repositories: > http://r-forge.r-project.org/' to DESCRIPTION.... but of course > winbuilder reports errors as it can't find 'qrmdata'.
First, there are plenty of CRAN package using: Additional_repositories: http://r-forge.r-project.org/ is used, cf. https://github.com/search?q=org%3Acran+Additional_repositories%3A+http%3A%2F%2Fr-forge.r-project.org&type=Code so this should be ok. I'm using it too. > > I'm wondering about what I am supposed to do: Remove everything about > 'qrmdata' from 'qrmtools'? Clearly, the easiest solution, but that's a > bit dull as the 'qrmtools' can be nicely used to deal with the data > from 'qrmdata'. It sounds that one of your vignettes, examples or package tests requires the qrmdata package. It is ok to use: Suggests: qrmdata but then you should make sure it is truly optional throughout, i.e. use if (require("qrmdata")) { ## Use qrmdata functions here } in your tests, examples etc. This is common practice. See also Writing R Extensions. Maybe there's something else to it? It would help clarify your problem if we could see the R CMD check issues and the code (online repository?). My $.02 Henrik > > How 'severe' is this issue for vignettes? I guess since they are > checked as well, one would run into the same problem. But then a > vignette even more so should show/replicate the functionality of a > paper, say, and there one would definitely like to work with the > data... > > The only partially related thread I found was > https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-package-devel/2015q2/000002.html > > In any case, I continue to pray to the R gods in the hope that the 5MB > limit will change for data-related packages (which are updated very > rarely) at some point in the future... Some 'adaptive limits' would be > nice: The less often you submit, the larger the data package can be > (for example), up to a certain larger limit more suitable for > data-related packages. > > Any ideas on (all of) that? > > Cheers, > Marius > > ______________________________________________ > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
