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

Dear all, Thank you for your proposals and discussions. Accordingly, because it seems there is no relevant alternative, I decided to propose an update of the « survivalmodels » instead of the initial maintener for repositioning it in the main CRAN repository and avoid the archiving of my

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