For various reasons, I've opted to make my packages available from my
own web page rather than submitting them to CRAN (mostly laziness -- for
a long time I didn't have the packages quite cleaned up enough to pass all
the tests). It occurred to me to wonder about the scripts used by CRAN
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 11:39:51AM -0500, Ben Bolker wrote:
do people think that I should bite the bullet and submit my packages to
CRAN instead?
Yes please.
Dirk
--
Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.
-- Niels Bohr
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 11:39:51AM -0500, Ben Bolker wrote:
do people think that I should bite the bullet and submit my packages to
CRAN instead?
Yes please.
Though you might also want to look at Bioconductor's reposTools package,
which is
maintainers to generate the PACKAGES file, and to generate PACKAGES.html
from PACKAGES. Are those something that could be made available? Or
do people think that I should bite the bullet and submit my packages to
CRAN instead?
You might want to take a peak at the 'reposTools' package
Thomas Lumley wrote:
Though you might also want to look at Bioconductor's reposTools package,
which is designed to manage packages with multiple repositories.
Is there any chance of a CVS repository for public but not necessarily
CRAN-quality R Code? Or better still, a sourceforge-type site
OK, then, one more concern: I'm trying to decide on an appropriate level
of resolution for distributing packages. At the moment I have bbmisc,
which is a package bundle consisting of about 6 packages of varying size
and specificity -- does that seem reasonable? Or do people prefer more,
Recently in R-devel, I've noticed that when I start up R, code in
.Rprofile (in the working directory) gets sourced but any messages printed
out by that code (e.g. by `cat') are printed *before* the introductory
statement about R.
For example, if I put the line
library(KernSmooth)
in my
What's changed is when the introductory message is printed, not when code
in .Rprofile is run:
revision 1.118
date: 2003/02/26 15:51:17; author: pd; state: Exp; lines: +6 -6
RNG change + delayed greeting
So it was intentional, but Peter D will have to explain why (as I wasn't
paying
