Re: [R-pkg-devel] pretest order
It will make them run. Best, Uwe Ligges On 23.10.2020 23:52, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal wrote: Thanks. I had a feeling that was the case from looking at the queue. Does the clearing make them run or do they need to be resubmitted? -Roy On Oct 23, 2020, at 2:43 PM, Uwe Ligges wrote: Generally by submission time, but there is a series of packages unprocessed stuck in the queue, will clear that up shortly. Best, Uwe On 23.10.2020 19:17, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-package-devel wrote: Just out of curiousity, how is pretest order determined? I have a package that was submitted yesterday that is still waiting pretest, while one I submitted today was just pretested. Both are just bug fixes of existing packages, not new packages. Thanks for the info and the work on CRAN, Having to deal recently with package hell in Python, I appreciate these efforts. -Roy ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] pretest order
Thanks. I had a feeling that was the case from looking at the queue. Does the clearing make them run or do they need to be resubmitted? -Roy > On Oct 23, 2020, at 2:43 PM, Uwe Ligges > wrote: > > Generally by submission time, but there is a series of packages unprocessed > stuck in the queue, will clear that up shortly. > > > Best, > Uwe > > On 23.10.2020 19:17, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-package-devel wrote: >> Just out of curiousity, how is pretest order determined? I have a package >> that was submitted yesterday that is still waiting pretest, while one I >> submitted today was just pretested. Both are just bug fixes of existing >> packages, not new packages. >> Thanks for the info and the work on CRAN, Having to deal recently with >> package hell in Python, I appreciate these efforts. >> -Roy >> ** >> "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. >> Government or NOAA." >> ** >> Roy Mendelssohn >> Supervisory Operations Research Analyst >> NOAA/NMFS >> Environmental Research Division >> Southwest Fisheries Science Center >> ***Note new street address*** >> 110 McAllister Way >> Santa Cruz, CA 95060 >> Phone: (831)-420-3666 >> Fax: (831) 420-3980 >> e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ >> "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." >> "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" >> "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. >> __ >> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] pretest order
Generally by submission time, but there is a series of packages unprocessed stuck in the queue, will clear that up shortly. Best, Uwe On 23.10.2020 19:17, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-package-devel wrote: Just out of curiousity, how is pretest order determined? I have a package that was submitted yesterday that is still waiting pretest, while one I submitted today was just pretested. Both are just bug fixes of existing packages, not new packages. Thanks for the info and the work on CRAN, Having to deal recently with package hell in Python, I appreciate these efforts. -Roy ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Delays in CRAN Windows Binaries?
I've made an example at https://github.com/tjtnew/newbies that uses
GitHub actions to monitor how many hours a package has been in the
"newbies" queue. It updates hourly and saves to a csv in the repo.
It's not something I have time to develop more but if someone wants to
pick it up and take it further please do. Disclaimer - hacked together
quite quickly so code could well be a little iffy.
Best
Tim
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 20:47, Henrik Bengtsson
wrote:
>
> Related to this:
>
> It would be neat to have a dashboard that reports on the current
> latency is on the different CRAN "queues" are, e.g. how long is the
> average waiting time when submitting a new package ("newbies") until
> you get a manual reply or it's on CRAN, submitting an update with all
> OK before it hits CRAN, waiting time for building Windows or macOS
> binaries, etc. Some, but not all, of this information can already be
> guestimated from the info on ftp://cran.r-project.org/incoming/, on
> easier on https://lockedata.github.io/cransays/articles/dashboard.html.
> I think this could be a great contributor project - it doesn't have to
> be hosted by CRAN.
>
> /Henrik
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 11:08 AM Marc Schwartz wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Just thought that I would check to see if there are any known issues/delays
> > for CRAN in creating R release and devel binaries for Windows for updated
> > packages.
> >
> > It has been four days since I submitted an update and the other binaries
> > were created within a couple of days. The two Windows binaries are the only
> > outstanding updates pending.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Marc Schwartz
> >
> > __
> > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>
> __
> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Licenses
Hi Uwe, Thanks for taking the time to reply. Would you be willing to clarify/confirm the current situation regarding the hosting of non-FOSS packages on CRAN, such as those with ACM or Creative Commons license variants that have non-commercial use restrictions? These are presently included in the license.db file. Are these on CRAN now because they are acceptable under the current policy, or are they on CRAN now, as Duncan posited, because they were acceptable under older policies and it would be disruptive to remove them now? Thanks, Marc > On Oct 23, 2020, at 8:57 AM, Uwe Ligges > wrote: > > I do not want to make many general comments about licenses in public, as this > is a very difficult matter and I am not a lawyer. > > But let me cite from the CRAN policies: > > "Packages with licenses not listed at > https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/share/licenses/license.db will generally > not be accepted. " > > Further, I see in the discussions that you talked about depending on a > software with a non-FOSS license. The CRAN team's point of view, for short, > is: > A package with a FOSS license cannot strictly depend on a package/software > that is non-FOSS. Obviously, the FOSS package cannot be used under its own > license conditions in that case. > > Best, > Uwe Ligges > > > > > On 23.10.2020 14:25, Ege Rubak wrote: >> Hi all, >> My two cents are below Marc's summary here: >> On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:33 -0400, Marc Schwartz wrote: >>> Right now, the interpretation, without further clarification from >>> CRAN, would be, it is ok for a package to be on CRAN with license >>> based usage restrictions included (e.g. for non-commercial use), but >>> a package on CRAN, irrespective of it's own license, cannot >>> "interact" with other packages that do have restrictions...which >>> seems inconsistent. >> It depends a bit what is meant by "interact". Years ago `spatstat` used >> `gpclib` with a non-commercial license to do polygonal operations. The >> solution was to list `gpclib` in `Suggests` and require the user to >> make an active choice to use this piece of software with a warning >> about non-commercial use. I find this to be an OK solution in lack of >> completely free alternatives. These days `gpclib` is still on CRAN and >> only has reverse `Suggests` and `Enhances`, so that seems fairly >> consistent. >> In the long run this was unsatisfatory and our specific problem was >> solved by Adrian Baddeley by making the `polyclip` package. >> Kind regards, >> Ege >> __ >> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel >> > > __ > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
[R-pkg-devel] pretest order
Just out of curiousity, how is pretest order determined? I have a package that was submitted yesterday that is still waiting pretest, while one I submitted today was just pretested. Both are just bug fixes of existing packages, not new packages. Thanks for the info and the work on CRAN, Having to deal recently with package hell in Python, I appreciate these efforts. -Roy ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Licenses
> On Oct 23, 2020, at 8:25 AM, Ege Rubak wrote: > > Hi all, > > My two cents are below Marc's summary here: > > On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:33 -0400, Marc Schwartz wrote: >> Right now, the interpretation, without further clarification from >> CRAN, would be, it is ok for a package to be on CRAN with license >> based usage restrictions included (e.g. for non-commercial use), but >> a package on CRAN, irrespective of it's own license, cannot >> "interact" with other packages that do have restrictions...which >> seems inconsistent. > > It depends a bit what is meant by "interact". Years ago `spatstat` used > `gpclib` with a non-commercial license to do polygonal operations. The > solution was to list `gpclib` in `Suggests` and require the user to > make an active choice to use this piece of software with a warning > about non-commercial use. I find this to be an OK solution in lack of > completely free alternatives. These days `gpclib` is still on CRAN and > only has reverse `Suggests` and `Enhances`, so that seems fairly > consistent. > > In the long run this was unsatisfatory and our specific problem was > solved by Adrian Baddeley by making the `polyclip` package. > > Kind regards, > Ege Hi Ege, The use of "Suggests" may be the relevant difference here. My use of the word "interact" was focused on the text in the CRAN policy that I quoted in my initial reply: "Such packages are not permitted to require (e.g., by specifying in ‘Depends’, ‘Imports’ or ‘LinkingTo’ fields) directly or indirectly a package or external software which restricts users or usage." As Duncan noted in his reply, there may be time based differences that are relevant here, if the CRAN policy had changed at some point, and there was, in effect, a grand-fathering of older packages that perhaps would not be accepted today under the current policy. Regards, Marc __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Delays in CRAN Windows Binaries?
Hi Uwe, Thanks for your reply. I appreciate all of the efforts by the CRAN team here. Regards, Marc > On Oct 23, 2020, at 8:47 AM, Uwe Ligges > wrote: > > Windows binaries may be delayed these days, but they are generated in a bunch > R-flavour-wise. They typical delay after a source package publication should > be less then 72 hours ideally. > > Best, > Uwe > > On 23.10.2020 14:05, Marc Schwartz wrote: >> Hi All, >> Just a quick note to indicate that one of the two Windows binaries for the >> package appeared overnight (EDT). Not sure if this experience is >> representative for others, or just a temporary bump in the road. >> Regards, >> Marc >>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Marc Schwartz wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Just thought that I would check to see if there are any known issues/delays >>> for CRAN in creating R release and devel binaries for Windows for updated >>> packages. >>> >>> It has been four days since I submitted an update and the other binaries >>> were created within a couple of days. The two Windows binaries are the only >>> outstanding updates pending. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Marc Schwartz >> __ >> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Delays in CRAN Windows Binaries?
Hi All, Just a quick note to indicate that one of the two Windows binaries for the package appeared overnight (EDT). Not sure if this experience is representative for others, or just a temporary bump in the road. Regards, Marc > On Oct 21, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Marc Schwartz wrote: > > Hi All, > > Just thought that I would check to see if there are any known issues/delays > for CRAN in creating R release and devel binaries for Windows for updated > packages. > > It has been four days since I submitted an update and the other binaries were > created within a couple of days. The two Windows binaries are the only > outstanding updates pending. > > Thanks! > > Marc Schwartz __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] [EXTERNAL] Re: Pre-test failure
My personal opinion is that as long as a package doesn't actually make it on to CRAN, you don't need to bump the version. It's worked so far -Original Message- From: R-package-devel On Behalf Of Ben Bolker Sent: Saturday, 24 October 2020 2:23 AM To: r-package-devel@r-project.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [R-pkg-devel] Pre-test failure Can you share the links to the CRAN pre-test logs? Someone here might be able to guess what went wrong ... (FWIW I always *think* I'm testing very carefully, and I almost always get something wrong ...) On 10/23/20 11:18 AM, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-package-devel wrote: > I test my packages very carefully before submission. Earlier today I > submitted a package that passed this morning on both winbuilder_release and > winbuilder_devel. The pre-test submission failed on rebuilding the vignette. > I just tried again on winbuilder_release and winbuilder_devel, no problems. > There are no problems either on my Mac or a Fedora image. Moreover I tested > the specific lines that were flagged, and they work fine > > So my questions are: > > 1. Should I just resubmit assuming it was some kind of quirk? > > 2. Do I need to bump up the version to resubmit? > > Thanks, > > -Roy > > > ** > "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. > Government or NOAA." > ** > Roy Mendelssohn > Supervisory Operations Research Analyst > NOAA/NMFS > Environmental Research Division > Southwest Fisheries Science Center > ***Note new street address*** > 110 McAllister Way > Santa Cruz, CA 95060 > Phone: (831)-420-3666 > Fax: (831) 420-3980 > e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pfeg.noaa.gov%2F&data=04%7C01%7Chongooi%40microsoft.com%7C05d6b3fb72074139cfd508d87767931b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637390634032310385%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=ZhyBMECoZohEfOqkRqz%2BwV6PB560jUKurP3eXyyfugg%3D&reserved=0 > > "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." > "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" > "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. > > __ > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstat.ethz.ch%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fr-package-devel&data=04%7C01%7Chongooi%40microsoft.com%7C05d6b3fb72074139cfd508d87767931b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637390634032310385%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CXtC%2FqbZ0B3znnxcTHQb2voADGKPFIhl1jfTrzGl%2Ft0%3D&reserved=0 > __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstat.ethz.ch%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fr-package-devel&data=04%7C01%7Chongooi%40microsoft.com%7C05d6b3fb72074139cfd508d87767931b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637390634032310385%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CXtC%2FqbZ0B3znnxcTHQb2voADGKPFIhl1jfTrzGl%2Ft0%3D&reserved=0 __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Pre-test failure
https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/plotdap_0.0.8_20201023_155845/Windows/00check.log my problem is I don't have Windows myself. So I assume if I can pass both winbuilders I should be good. Here is the link to winbuilder_release I just ran: https://win-builder.r-project.org/exQtKk9TKIeP As you can see, that is ok and rebuilt the vignette just fine. Thanks, -Roy > On Oct 23, 2020, at 8:22 AM, Ben Bolker wrote: > > Can you share the links to the CRAN pre-test logs? Someone here might be > able to guess what went wrong ... > > (FWIW I always *think* I'm testing very carefully, and I almost always get > something wrong ...) > > On 10/23/20 11:18 AM, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-package-devel > wrote: >> I test my packages very carefully before submission. Earlier today I >> submitted a package that passed this morning on both winbuilder_release and >> winbuilder_devel. The pre-test submission failed on rebuilding the >> vignette. I just tried again on winbuilder_release and winbuilder_devel, >> no problems. There are no problems either on my Mac or a Fedora image. >> Moreover I tested the specific lines that were flagged, and they work fine >> So my questions are: >> 1. Should I just resubmit assuming it was some kind of quirk? >> 2. Do I need to bump up the version to resubmit? >> Thanks, >> -Roy >> ** >> "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. >> Government or NOAA." >> ** >> Roy Mendelssohn >> Supervisory Operations Research Analyst >> NOAA/NMFS >> Environmental Research Division >> Southwest Fisheries Science Center >> ***Note new street address*** >> 110 McAllister Way >> Santa Cruz, CA 95060 >> Phone: (831)-420-3666 >> Fax: (831) 420-3980 >> e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ >> "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." >> "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" >> "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. >> __ >> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel >> > > __ > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Pre-test failure
Can you share the links to the CRAN pre-test logs? Someone here might be able to guess what went wrong ... (FWIW I always *think* I'm testing very carefully, and I almost always get something wrong ...) On 10/23/20 11:18 AM, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-package-devel wrote: I test my packages very carefully before submission. Earlier today I submitted a package that passed this morning on both winbuilder_release and winbuilder_devel. The pre-test submission failed on rebuilding the vignette. I just tried again on winbuilder_release and winbuilder_devel, no problems. There are no problems either on my Mac or a Fedora image. Moreover I tested the specific lines that were flagged, and they work fine So my questions are: 1. Should I just resubmit assuming it was some kind of quirk? 2. Do I need to bump up the version to resubmit? Thanks, -Roy ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
[R-pkg-devel] Pre-test failure
I test my packages very carefully before submission. Earlier today I submitted a package that passed this morning on both winbuilder_release and winbuilder_devel. The pre-test submission failed on rebuilding the vignette. I just tried again on winbuilder_release and winbuilder_devel, no problems. There are no problems either on my Mac or a Fedora image. Moreover I tested the specific lines that were flagged, and they work fine So my questions are: 1. Should I just resubmit assuming it was some kind of quirk? 2. Do I need to bump up the version to resubmit? Thanks, -Roy ** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Licenses
I do not want to make many general comments about licenses in public, as this is a very difficult matter and I am not a lawyer. But let me cite from the CRAN policies: "Packages with licenses not listed at https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/share/licenses/license.db will generally not be accepted. " Further, I see in the discussions that you talked about depending on a software with a non-FOSS license. The CRAN team's point of view, for short, is: A package with a FOSS license cannot strictly depend on a package/software that is non-FOSS. Obviously, the FOSS package cannot be used under its own license conditions in that case. Best, Uwe Ligges On 23.10.2020 14:25, Ege Rubak wrote: Hi all, My two cents are below Marc's summary here: On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:33 -0400, Marc Schwartz wrote: Right now, the interpretation, without further clarification from CRAN, would be, it is ok for a package to be on CRAN with license based usage restrictions included (e.g. for non-commercial use), but a package on CRAN, irrespective of it's own license, cannot "interact" with other packages that do have restrictions...which seems inconsistent. It depends a bit what is meant by "interact". Years ago `spatstat` used `gpclib` with a non-commercial license to do polygonal operations. The solution was to list `gpclib` in `Suggests` and require the user to make an active choice to use this piece of software with a warning about non-commercial use. I find this to be an OK solution in lack of completely free alternatives. These days `gpclib` is still on CRAN and only has reverse `Suggests` and `Enhances`, so that seems fairly consistent. In the long run this was unsatisfatory and our specific problem was solved by Adrian Baddeley by making the `polyclip` package. Kind regards, Ege __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Delays in CRAN Windows Binaries?
Windows binaries may be delayed these days, but they are generated in a bunch R-flavour-wise. They typical delay after a source package publication should be less then 72 hours ideally. Best, Uwe On 23.10.2020 14:05, Marc Schwartz wrote: Hi All, Just a quick note to indicate that one of the two Windows binaries for the package appeared overnight (EDT). Not sure if this experience is representative for others, or just a temporary bump in the road. Regards, Marc On Oct 21, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Marc Schwartz wrote: Hi All, Just thought that I would check to see if there are any known issues/delays for CRAN in creating R release and devel binaries for Windows for updated packages. It has been four days since I submitted an update and the other binaries were created within a couple of days. The two Windows binaries are the only outstanding updates pending. Thanks! Marc Schwartz __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Licenses
Hi all, My two cents are below Marc's summary here: On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:33 -0400, Marc Schwartz wrote: > Right now, the interpretation, without further clarification from > CRAN, would be, it is ok for a package to be on CRAN with license > based usage restrictions included (e.g. for non-commercial use), but > a package on CRAN, irrespective of it's own license, cannot > "interact" with other packages that do have restrictions...which > seems inconsistent. It depends a bit what is meant by "interact". Years ago `spatstat` used `gpclib` with a non-commercial license to do polygonal operations. The solution was to list `gpclib` in `Suggests` and require the user to make an active choice to use this piece of software with a warning about non-commercial use. I find this to be an OK solution in lack of completely free alternatives. These days `gpclib` is still on CRAN and only has reverse `Suggests` and `Enhances`, so that seems fairly consistent. In the long run this was unsatisfatory and our specific problem was solved by Adrian Baddeley by making the `polyclip` package. Kind regards, Ege __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
