Re: [R-pkg-devel] [External] RcmdrPlugin.HH_1.1-48.tar.gz

Thank you Duncan, Jeff, Ivan. I did all that Duncan and Jeff suggested, plus a bit more that appeared to be necessary. All of what I did is documented in the RcmdrPlugin.HH/NEWS file. Ivan's comments were received after I sent 1.1-50 to CRAN and it was accepted. I suggest that my notes in the

Re: [R-pkg-devel] RcmdrPlugin.HH_1.1-48.tar.gz

В Tue, 5 Mar 2024 22:41:32 + "Richard M. Heiberger" пишет: > Undocumented code objects: >'.__global__' > All user-level objects in a package should have documentation > entries. See chapter 'Writing R documentation files' in the 'Writing R > Extensions' manual. This object is not

Re: [R-pkg-devel] [External] RcmdrPlugin.HH_1.1-48.tar.gz

Remove leading periods from all file names in the tar.gz. Use .Rbuildignore to handle such files in your dev directory if you need them. Maybe also look at [1]. [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40950799/r-cmd-check-error-how-to-get-rid-of-hidden-files-and-directory-in-devel-r-pack On

Re: [R-pkg-devel] [External] RcmdrPlugin.HH_1.1-48.tar.gz

Almost. I used prompt(".__global__") to create file man/.__global__.Rd This file does not appear in the tar.gz file, but without a note of rejection. When I checked my disk directory directly R CMD check RcmdrPlugin.HH the file was rejected with Found the following hidden files and

Re: [R-pkg-devel] RFC: C backtraces for R CMD check via just-in-time debugging

I use libunwind in my programs, works quite well, and simple to use. Happy to share the code if there is interest.. best Vladimir Dergachev On Mon, 4 Mar 2024, Ivan Krylov via R-package-devel wrote: On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 19:19:43 -0800 Kevin Ushey wrote: Would libSegFault be useful here?

Re: [R-pkg-devel] RcmdrPlugin.HH_1.1-48.tar.gz

On 05/03/2024 5:41 p.m., Richard M. Heiberger wrote: My package is being rejected by auto-check Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc, r-devel-windows-x86_64 Check: for missing documentation entries, Result: WARNING Undocumented code objects: '.__global__' All user-level objects in a

[R-pkg-devel] RcmdrPlugin.HH_1.1-48.tar.gz

My package is being rejected by auto-check Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc, r-devel-windows-x86_64 Check: for missing documentation entries, Result: WARNING Undocumented code objects: '.__global__' All user-level objects in a package should have documentation entries. See chapter

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 5 March 2024 at 15:12, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | On 05/03/2024 2:26 p.m., Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > The default behaviour is to build after every commit to the main branch. But | > there are options. On the repo I mentioned we use | > | > "branch": "*release", | | Where do you put

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 05/03/2024 2:26 p.m., Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: On 5 March 2024 at 13:28, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | What I'm seeing is that the tags are ignored, and it is distributing the | HEAD of the main branch. I don't think most users should be using that | version: in my packages it won't have had

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 5 March 2024 at 13:28, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | What I'm seeing is that the tags are ignored, and it is distributing the | HEAD of the main branch. I don't think most users should be using that | version: in my packages it won't have had full reverse dependency | checks, I only do that

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 05/03/2024 1:04 p.m., Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: On 5 March 2024 at 11:56, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | I have mixed feelings about r-universe. On the one hand, it is really | nicely put together, and it offers the service described above. On the | other, it's probably a bad idea to follow its

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 5 March 2024 at 11:56, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | I have mixed feelings about r-universe. On the one hand, it is really | nicely put together, and it offers the service described above. On the | other, it's probably a bad idea to follow its advice and use | install.packages() with `repos`

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 05/03/2024 12:08 p.m., Josiah Parry wrote: My understanding is that the order of CRAN repos available in `options("repos")` are tried sequentially. So if cran.r-rproject.org is first, that will be tried. If the package is not available there, the next repository

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

My understanding is that the order of CRAN repos available in `options("repos")` are tried sequentially. So if cran.r-rproject.org is first, that will be tried. If the package is not available there, the next repository will be tried. I do appreciate the ease of release to R-universe quite a bit

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 05/03/2024 8:02 a.m., Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: On 5 March 2024 at 06:25, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | You could make a compatible version of `survivalmodels` available on a | non-CRAN website, and refer to that website in the | Additional_repositories field of DESCRIPTION. Every r-universe

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 5 March 2024 at 06:25, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | You could make a compatible version of `survivalmodels` available on a | non-CRAN website, and refer to that website in the | Additional_repositories field of DESCRIPTION. Every r-universe sub-site fits that requirement. For this package

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

On 05/03/2024 5:58 a.m., Yohann Foucher wrote: Dear R-Members, I just have submitted an update of the ‘survivalSL' package because the last version depends on the ‘survivalmodels’ package, which has been recently archived. In the DESCRIPTION file of the new version 0.93 of the ‘survivalSL'

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

Suggested packages should be used conditionally. If available, use it, otherwise the code should fail gracefully. Best, Uwe Ligges On 05.03.2024 11:58, Yohann Foucher wrote: Dear R-Members, I just have submitted an update of the ‘survivalSL' package because the last version depends on the

[R-pkg-devel] Suggesting an archived package in the DESCRIPTION file

Dear R-Members, I just have submitted an update of the ‘survivalSL' package because the last version depends on the ‘survivalmodels’ package, which has been recently archived. In the DESCRIPTION file of the new version 0.93 of the ‘survivalSL' package, I've moved ‘survivalmodels' from