My 2 cents from the perspective of a non-native speaker who's teaching a lot of international students:
We use "latest by Sunday 23h59" to indicate "before Monday". We found that this caused less confusion, as nobody could argue that "the message said Monday". Kind regards Joris -----Original Message----- From: R-package-devel <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Uwe Ligges Sent: Friday, 12 December 2025 16:41 To: Ben Bolker <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Resubmitting Archived Packages On 12.12.2025 16:33, Ben Bolker wrote: > I hesitate to prolong this part of the conversation, but ... > > ... when CRAN says "issues need fixing before [DATE]" (e.g. see > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhadl > ey.github.io%2Fcran-deadlines%2F&data=05%7C02%7CJoris.Meys%40ugent.be% > 7C94d0073619014b1a93f508de3996ae74%7Cd7811cdeecef496c8f91a1786241b99c% > 7C1%7C0%7C639011516505199946%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiO > nRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=wuTjLDrzDPRuk3uQLjUJElTv9EQimjtDGJ95%2FTIspMQ%3D&reserved=0), > is that technically "on or before" or "strictly before"? Without worrying > about time zones at the moment, if my deadline is 2026-01-01 and I upload a > new version of my package sometime on 2026-01-01, am I OK? Or do I need to > have uploaded a version on the previous day? "Before" is meant as "<". In the past we had communication issues as is was not obvious for everybody that British English speakers use "by" in the sense of "<". I believed "before" was clear enough, but maybe we have to use a mathematical expression? Best, Uwe Ligges > cheers > Ben Bolker > > On 2025-12-11 6:38 p.m., Kenny, Christopher wrote: >> Thank you both for your responses. >> >> The deadline had not passed at the time the package was removed. It >> was before the deadline at every single point on Earth. He removed >> the package early. It's an error, plain and simple. >> >> I'm happy to share the email with the deadline if that would help. >> >> Thank you also for reviewing the update to geomander. >> >> (On the point of manual review, the package goes to newbies, but >> based on the speed of the response, it may not take an entire human >> review in the same way as other packages.) >> >> Best, >> Chris >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: Uwe Ligges <[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2025 6:24 PM >> To: Kenny, Christopher <[email protected]>; R Package >> Development <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Resubmitting Archived Packages >> >> >> On 11.12.2025 20:07, Kenny, Christopher wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> >>> I was looking for advice on best practices for resubmitting packages >>> that were archived. >>> >>> This morning, Brian Ripley erroneously archived one of my packages >>> (geomander) prior to the deadline to fix a broken example. He then >>> archived its reverse dependencies a few minutes later. >> >> >> Why erroneously? Your deadline passed. >> A new deadline was set for the reverse dependencies, but as mail to >> the maintainer bounced, that new deadline was not needed as the >> reverse dependencies got archived for themselves as they are unmaintained. >> >> >> >> >>> >>> Given that CRAN is closing for the winter soon, I would like to fix >>> this issue quickly. I have already resubmitted geomander this >>> morning, as I had originally planned. However, as the packages are >>> archived, each now must undergo a manual review, which takes more time. >>> >>> Is it acceptable to submit the other downstream packages while the >>> first is awaiting manual checks, as long as they are submitted in >>> order of the dependency tree? As the original package had only a >>> broken example and the reverse dependencies were actively passing >>> checks, the review should be simple. >> >> >> Please submit geomander and get it accepted first. The others will be >> auto-archived otherwise. >> >> Best, >> Uwe Ligges >> >> >>> I would appreciate any advice or wisdom on how to reupload them >>> expeditiously. >>> >>> Best, >>> Chris >>> >>> christophertkenny.com - [email protected] Christopher >>> T. Kenny, PhD Postdoctoral Research Associate, Data-Driven Social >>> Science, Princeton University >>> ______________________________________________ >>> [email protected] mailing list >>> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fst >>> at.ethz.ch%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fr-package-devel&data=05%7C02%7CJor >>> is.Meys%40ugent.be%7C94d0073619014b1a93f508de3996ae74%7Cd7811cdeecef >>> 496c8f91a1786241b99c%7C1%7C0%7C639011516505233052%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbG >>> Zsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIk >>> FOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=oW5sqqSe8yAU8vRIbC >>> Xh2f236gceI2xth9ZerexmFMA%3D&reserved=0 >> >> ______________________________________________ >> [email protected] mailing list >> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsta >> t.ethz.ch%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fr-package-devel&data=05%7C02%7CJoris >> .Meys%40ugent.be%7C94d0073619014b1a93f508de3996ae74%7Cd7811cdeecef496 >> c8f91a1786241b99c%7C1%7C0%7C639011516505256097%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3 >> d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjo >> iTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RpANszoaP5vCjroFeW%2BRSh >> PnZUcnSGf3zXhyxcQaaqE%3D&reserved=0 > ______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
