Rather than a plethora of fields, perhaps the Depends field could indicate
what depends on the object: For example, if we use file extensions to
indicate what is dependent then one might write this to indicate that
some .Rd (i.e. examples) and .Rnw (i.e. vignette) files depend on lattice
and the e
Martin Maechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I like the idea and will look into applying the patch
> (note there's at least one typo which makes "make check" fail:
> /priotiry/)
Great. Sorry for the typo, I've sent an update privately.
> A propos:
>
> A while back (in last summer?), we (some o
Martin Maechler wrote:
> ...
>
>The idea was a field related to but weaker than 'Suggests' :
>Something like
> 'canMakeUseOf: [, , ... ]
>which is *not* used in any QA/QC checking, but is purely
>informative: If is require()able, then some examples may
>look nicer, a function may provide ano
> "Seth" == Seth Falcon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> on Mon, 28 Aug 2006 17:42:39 -0700 writes:
Seth> Hi all, The write_PACKAGES function has a 'fields'
Seth> argument that allows a user generating a PACKAGES file
Seth> to specify additional fields to include. For
Seth> symme
Hi all,
The write_PACKAGES function has a 'fields' argument that allows a user
generating a PACKAGES file to specify additional fields to include.
For symmetry, it would be nice for the available.packages function to
be able to read those extra fields when specified.
Similarly, it would be useful
