-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf
Of mark.braving...@csiro.au
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 6:30 PM
Cc: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
I'm concerned this thread is heading the wrong way, towards techno-fixes
for imaginary
problems. R
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Kevin Wright kw.s...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll echo Mark's concerns. R _used_ to be a language for turning ideas
into software quickly. Now it is more like prototyping ideas in software
quickly, and then spend a substantial amount
Mark
I would like to clarify two specific points.
On 12-03-31 04:41 AM, mark.braving...@csiro.au wrote:
...
Someone has subsequently decided that code should look a certain way, and has
added a check that
isn't in the language itself-- but they haven't thought of everything, and of
course
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Paul Gilbert pgilbert...@gmail.com wrote:
Mark
I would like to clarify two specific points.
On 12-03-31 04:41 AM, mark.braving...@csiro.au wrote:
...
Someone has subsequently decided that code should look a certain way, and
has added a check that
isn't in
-Original Message-
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org]
On Behalf Of Paul Gilbert
Sent: March-31-12 9:57 AM
To: mark.braving...@csiro.au
Cc: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
Greetings all
Mark
I would like
Message-
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org]
On Behalf Of Paul Gilbert
Sent: March-31-12 9:57 AM
To: mark.braving...@csiro.au
Cc: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
Greetings all
Mark
I would like to clarify two specific points
-Original Message-
From: Spencer Graves [mailto:spencer.gra...@prodsyse.com]
Sent: March-31-12 1:56 PM
To: Ted Byers
Cc: 'Paul Gilbert'; mark.braving...@csiro.au; r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
Hi, Ted:
Thank you for the most eloquent
Mark.Bravington at csiro.au writes:
There must be over 2000 people who have written CRAN packages by now; every
extra
check and non-back-compatible additional requirement runs the risk of
generating false-negatives and
incurring many extra person-hours to fix non-problems. Plus someone needs
Paul,
One of the things I have noticed with the R 2.15.0 RC and --as-cran is
that the I have to bump the version number of the working copy of my
[snip]
I am curious how other developers approach this.
Regardless of --as-cran I find it very useful to use the date as minor
part of the
Spotfire, TIBCO Software
wdunlap tibco.com
-Original Message-
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On
Behalf
Of mark.braving...@csiro.au
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 6:30 PM
Cc: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
I'm
Cc: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch; Spencer Graves
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
Most of that stuff is already in codetools, at least when it is checking
functions
with checkUsage(). E.g., arguments of ~ are not checked. The expr
argument
to with() will not be checked if you add skipWith
...@stat.math.ethz.ch; Spencer Graves
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
Most of that stuff is already in codetools, at least when it is checking
functions
with checkUsage(). E.g., arguments of ~ are not checked. The expr
argument
to with() will not be checked if you add skipWith=FALSE
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Thomas Lumley tlum...@uw.edu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Gabor Grothendieck
ggrothendi...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/3/28 Uwe Ligges lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de:
On 27.03.2012 20:33, Jeffrey Ryan wrote:
Thanks Uwe for the clarification on what
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 16:52 +1300, Thomas Lumley wrote:
The 'No visible binding for global variable is a good example. This
found some bugs in my 'survey' package, which I removed. There is
still one note of this type, which arises when I have to handle two
different versions of the hexbin
On Mar 29, 2012, at 14:58 , Brian G. Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 16:52 +1300, Thomas Lumley wrote:
The 'No visible binding for global variable is a good example. This
found some bugs in my 'survey' package, which I removed. There is
still one note of this type, which arises when I
On 03/29/2012 05:00 AM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
The 'No visible binding for global variable is a good example. This
found some bugs in my 'survey' package, which I removed. There is
still one note of this type, which arises when I have to handle two
different versions of the hexbin
On 29 March 2012 at 07:58, Brian G. Peterson wrote:
| On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 16:52 +1300, Thomas Lumley wrote:
| The 'No visible binding for global variable is a good example. This
| found some bugs in my 'survey' package, which I removed. There is
| still one note of this type, which arises
On 3/29/2012 7:07 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 29 March 2012 at 07:58, Brian G. Peterson wrote:
| On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 16:52 +1300, Thomas Lumley wrote:
| The 'No visible binding for global variable is a good example. This
| found some bugs in my 'survey' package, which I removed. There
-Original Message-
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On
Behalf
Of Terry Therneau
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 7:02 AM
To: r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
On 03/29/2012 05:00 AM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote
William Dunlap wdunlap at tibco.com writes:
-Original Message-
The survival package has a similar special case: the routines for
expected population survival are set up to accept multiple types of date
format so have lines like
if (class(x) == 'chron') { y - as.numeric(x -
Bill Dunlap
Spotfire, TIBCO Software
wdunlap tibco.com
-Original Message-
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On
Behalf
Of Matthew Dowle
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 10:41 AM
To: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
William Dunlapwdunlapat tibco.com writes:
-Original Message-
The survival package has a similar special case: the routines for
expected population survival are set up to accept multiple types of date
format so have lines like
if (class(x
:41 AM
To: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
William Dunlapwdunlapat tibco.com writes:
-Original Message-
The survival package has a similar special case: the routines for
expected population survival are set up to accept multiple types of date
Most of that stuff is already in codetools, at least when it is checking
functions
with checkUsage(). E.g., arguments of ~ are not checked. The expr argument
to with() will not be checked if you add skipWith=FALSE to the call to
checkUsage.
library(codetools)
[had...@rice.edu]
Sent: 30 March 2012 07:42
To: William Dunlap
Cc: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch; Spencer Graves
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
Most of that stuff is already in codetools, at least when it is checking
functions
with checkUsage(). E.g., arguments of ~ are not checked. The expr
Hobart
Australia
From:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [r-devel-boun...@r-project.org]
On Behalf Of Hadley Wickham [had...@rice.edu]
Sent: 30 March 2012 07:42
To: William Dunlap
Cc:r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch; Spencer Graves
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
-devel-boun...@r-project.org [r-devel-boun...@r-project.org]
On Behalf Of Hadley Wickham [had...@rice.edu]
Sent: 30 March 2012 07:42
To: William Dunlap
Cc:r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch; Spencer Graves
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
Most of that stuff is already in codetools, at least when
From: x...@yihui.name
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:40:04 -0500
To: r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] CRAN policies
I have been wondering if it is possible to automate the checking
process to reduce human efforts, e.g. automatically check the packages
submitted to FTP, and send
On 28.03.2012 00:07, Hadley Wickham wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Prof Brian Ripley
rip...@stats.ox.ac.uk wrote:
CRAN has for some time had a policies page at
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html
and we would like to draw this to the attention of package
On 27.03.2012 20:33, Jeffrey Ryan wrote:
Thanks Uwe for the clarification on what goes and what stays.
Still fuzzy on the notion of significant though. Do you have an example
or two for the list?
We have to look at those notes again and again in order to find if
something important is
On 27.03.2012 20:36, Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
2012/3/27 Uwe Liggeslig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de:
On 27.03.2012 19:10, Jeffrey Ryan wrote:
Is there a distinction as to NOTE vs. WARNING that is documented? I've
always assumed (wrongly?) that NOTES weren't an issue with publishing on
2012/3/28 Uwe Ligges lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de:
On 27.03.2012 20:33, Jeffrey Ryan wrote:
Thanks Uwe for the clarification on what goes and what stays.
Still fuzzy on the notion of significant though. Do you have an example
or two for the list?
We have to look at those notes
On 28.03.2012 16:30, Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
2012/3/28 Uwe Liggeslig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de:
On 27.03.2012 20:33, Jeffrey Ryan wrote:
Thanks Uwe for the clarification on what goes and what stays.
Still fuzzy on the notion of significant though. Do you have an example
or two for
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Gabor Grothendieck
ggrothendi...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/3/28 Uwe Ligges lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de:
On 27.03.2012 20:33, Jeffrey Ryan wrote:
Thanks Uwe for the clarification on what goes and what stays.
Still fuzzy on the notion of significant though.
CRAN has for some time had a policies page at
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html
and we would like to draw this to the attention of package maintainers.
In particular, please
- always send a submission email to c...@r-project.org with the package
name and version on the
One of the things I have noticed with the R 2.15.0 RC and --as-cran is
that the I have to bump the version number of the working copy of my
packages immediately after putting a version on CRAN, or I get an
message about version suitability. This is probably a good thing for
packages that I
On 27.03.2012 16:17, Paul Gilbert wrote:
One of the things I have noticed with the R 2.15.0 RC and --as-cran is
that the I have to bump the version number of the working copy of my
packages immediately after putting a version on CRAN, or I get an
message about version suitability. This is
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Prof Brian Ripley
rip...@stats.ox.ac.uk wrote:
CRAN has for some time had a policies page at
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html
and we would like to draw this to the attention of package maintainers. In
particular, please
- always send a
On 12-03-27 10:59 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
On 27.03.2012 16:17, Paul Gilbert wrote:
One of the things I have noticed with the R 2.15.0 RC and --as-cran is
that the I have to bump the version number of the working copy of my
packages immediately after putting a version on CRAN, or I get an
On 27.03.2012 17:22, Paul Gilbert wrote:
On 12-03-27 10:59 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
On 27.03.2012 16:17, Paul Gilbert wrote:
One of the things I have noticed with the R 2.15.0 RC and --as-cran is
that the I have to bump the version number of the working copy of my
packages immediately after
On 27.03.2012 17:09, Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Prof Brian Ripley
rip...@stats.ox.ac.uk wrote:
CRAN has for some time had a policies page at
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html
and we would like to draw this to the attention of package
On 27/03/2012 15:17, Paul Gilbert wrote:
One of the things I have noticed with the R 2.15.0 RC and --as-cran is
that the I have to bump the version number of the working copy of my
packages immediately after putting a version on CRAN, or I get an
message about version suitability. This is
2012/3/27 Uwe Ligges lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de:
On 27.03.2012 17:09, Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Prof Brian Ripley
rip...@stats.ox.ac.uk wrote:
CRAN has for some time had a policies page at
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html
and we
2012/3/27 Uwe Ligges lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de:
On 27.03.2012 19:10, Jeffrey Ryan wrote:
Is there a distinction as to NOTE vs. WARNING that is documented? I've
always assumed (wrongly?) that NOTES weren't an issue with publishing on
CRAN, but that they may change to WARNINGS at some
An associated problem, for the wish list, is that it would be nice for
package developers to have a way to automatically distinguish between
NOTEs that can usually be ignored (e.g. a package suggests a package
that is not available for cross reference checks - I have several case
where the
I have been wondering if it is possible to automate the checking
process to reduce human efforts, e.g. automatically check the packages
submitted to FTP, and send the package maintainer an email in case of
warnings or errors (otherwise just move it to CRAN); package
maintainers can appeal for
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Prof Brian Ripley
rip...@stats.ox.ac.uk wrote:
CRAN has for some time had a policies page at
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html
and we would like to draw this to the attention of package maintainers. In
particular, please
Thanks for the
Lots of very sensible policies here. I have one request as someone
who has in several cases had to involve company lawyers over
intellectual property issues with packages on CRAN -- the first bullet
point on ownership of copyright and intellectual property rights could
be strengthened further.
48 matches
Mail list logo
