On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Thomas Lumley <tlum...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > On Fri, 16 Apr 2010, Simon Urbanek wrote: > >> >> On Apr 16, 2010, at 4:38 AM, Henrik Bengtsson wrote: >> >>> I think what people are also thinking about is that the policy for >>> publishing a package on CRAN is that it have to pass R CMD check with >>> no errors, warnings *or* notes.
WRONG: As already said by other, it is indeed possible to get packages with 'notes' onto CRAN. I have at some point in history became to believe this, but I went back in my submission log and I only found one case and it is was more Kurt H. kindly suggesting that I should fix an incorrectly formatted license (reported as a NOTE). Thanks for making me aware of this. Sorry for adding noise! /Henrik >> >> Can you cite your reference, please? I see only (R-ext 1.5 Submitting a >> package to CRAN): >> >> "Please ensure that you can run through the complete procedure with only >> warnings that you understand and have reasons not to eliminate. In >> principle, packages must pass R CMD check without warnings to be admitted to >> the main CRAN package area. If there are warnings you cannot eliminate (for >> example because you believe them to be spurious) send an explanatory note >> with your submission." >> >> It talks explicitly about warnings, notes are not mentioned at all... That >> said, you should examine all notes and make sure they are not indications of >> problems. >> > > In my experience, if a package is new or previously checked without notes, > the CRAN maintainers will likely ask you to look at them to make sure they > aren't problems, but there isn't any difficulty in getting a package on CRAN > if it has notes. A whole lot of packages on CRAN have notes even when > checked on r-release. > > CMD check notes are the R equivalent of old-time lint warnings in C, and as > the First Commandment says: > Thou shalt run lint frequently and study its pronouncements with > care, for verily its perception and judgement oft exceed thine. > and the prophet (Henry Spencer) expands on this: > ``Study'' doth not mean mindless zeal to eradicate every byte of lint > output-if for no other reason, because thou just canst not shut it up about > some things-but that thou should know the cause of its unhappiness and > understand what worrisome sign it tries to speak of. > > > -thomas > > Thomas Lumley Assoc. Professor, Biostatistics > tlum...@u.washington.edu University of Washington, Seattle > > ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel