Hi Hadley,
On 8 August 2023 at 08:34, Hadley Wickham wrote:
| Do you think it's worth also/instead considering a fix to S4 to avoid
| this caching issue in future R versions?
That is somewhat orthogonal to my point of "'some uses' of the 20 year old S4
system (which as we know is fairly widely
Hi Dirk,
Do you think it's worth also/instead considering a fix to S4 to avoid
this caching issue in future R versions?
(This is top of my for me as we consider the design of S7, and I
recently made a note to ensure we avoid similar problems there:
Hi Ivan,
I usually 'mentally applaud' when reading your replies on list but not here.
On 7 August 2023 at 16:15, Ivan Krylov wrote:
| SeuratObject 4.1.3. The breakage definitely exists, but not on the
| source package level.
You seem to overlook that a large part of the R Universe only works
В Sun, 6 Aug 2023 16:05:03 -0500
Dirk Eddelbuettel пишет:
> One possibility may be to add a new (versioned) field 'Breaks:'.
> Matrix could then have added 'Breaks: SeuratObject (<= 4.1.3)'
> preventing an installation of Matrix 1.6.0 when SeuratObject 4.1.3
> (or earlier) is present, but
I would support this suggestion. There is a similar binary
dependency chain from Matrix → TMB → glmmTMB; we have implemented
various checks to make users aware that they need to reinstall from
source, and to some extent we've tried to push out synchronous updates
(i.e., push an update of
CRAN, by relying on the powerful package management system that is part of R,
provides an unparalleled framework for extending R with nearly 20k packages.
We recently encountered an issue that highlights a missing element in the
otherwise outstanding package management system. So we would like
