I'm using
Depends: R (>= 2.12.0)
to communicate that I've tested/verified that the package works as far
back as R 2.12.0.
Also, since R (>= 3.5.1) and R (>= 3.5.0) has been mentioned here, in
'Writing R Extensions' there is:
"It is inadvisable to use a dependence on R with patchlevel (the
Thanks, Martin.
I have backed off MotifDB’s R requirement to 3.5.0. I will experiment with
removing the requirement entirely in the new devel branch.
- Paul
> On Nov 3, 2018, at 1:37 AM, Martin Morgan wrote:
>
> If users are 'playing by the books' and using BiocManager::install(), the
>
If users are 'playing by the books' and using BiocManager::install(), the
version of R is coupled with the version of Bioconductor / your package, so
specifying an R version is irrelevant. In addition, saying your package has a
dependency R >=... implies that there will be no breaking changes
A user of MotifDb requests - sensibly, I think - that I loosen the requirement
Depends: R (>= 3.5.1)
which I added before the release. This seems sensible and supported by, for
example, R (>= 2.10) in GenomicRanges.
Is this, then, the heuristic?
- new packages should depend on the
