S Ellison wrote:
>
> Package review is a nice idea. But you raise a worrying point.
> Are any of the 'downright dangerous' packages on CRAN?
> If so, er... why?
>
>
>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/01/07 7:21 AM >>>
>>I think the need for this is rather urgent, in fact. Most packages are
>>very good, but I regret to say some are pretty inefficient and others
>>downright dangerous.
>
>
Presumably because the primary requirement for packages being
accepted on CRAN is that they pass "R CMD check". This is a fine
minimum standard -- it means that packages will definitely install --
but there's nothing to stop anyone posting a package full of
statistical nonsense to CRAN, as far as I know. I'm _not_ suggesting
that R-core should take up this challenge, but this is where ratings
come in.
Ben Bolker
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Rating-R-Helpers-tf4925550.html#a14163486
Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
