Re: [Bioc-devel] BiocInstaller not supporting R 3.4.0 -- yes, it's early, but shouldn't it default to using Bioc-devel instead of Bioc-release in this scenario?

2016-03-22 Thread Leonardo Collado Torres
Thanks for the new feature Martin! I also have to thank Jim Hester for adding support for R version 3.3.0 on Travis. I know that we'll use R-3-3-branch for Bioc 3.4, but it's good to mention it on the thread for reference. Best, Leo On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Martin Morgan wrote: > the bi

Re: [Bioc-devel] BiocInstaller not supporting R 3.4.0 -- yes, it's early, but shouldn't it default to using Bioc-devel instead of Bioc-release in this scenario?

2016-03-22 Thread Martin Morgan
the biocLite.R script has been changed to use bioc-devel when the R version is 'too new'. Worth pointing out perhaps that Bioconductor will not use R-devel again for another six months -- after our next release, both release and devel versions of Bioconductor will use the R-3-3-branch, because

Re: [Bioc-devel] BiocInstaller not supporting R 3.4.0 -- yes, it's early, but shouldn't it default to using Bioc-devel instead of Bioc-release in this scenario?

2016-03-22 Thread Leonardo Collado Torres
Check Jim Hester's thoughts on this issue https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/5809#issuecomment-199858950 One way of solving it is by having BiocInstaller allow using Bioc-devel with R 3.4.0. On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Leonardo Collado Torres wrote: > Hi, > > This is definitely

[Bioc-devel] BiocInstaller not supporting R 3.4.0 -- yes, it's early, but shouldn't it default to using Bioc-devel instead of Bioc-release in this scenario?

2016-03-22 Thread Leonardo Collado Torres
Hi, This is definitely 4 weeks early and things are working as intended. Due to https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/5809 I noticed that BiocInstaller does not yet support R 3.4.0. The main issue was my assumption that R-travis using `r: devel` would install R 3.3.0 as I describe in the i