From ucfagls at gmail.com  Thu Aug 28 00:34:31 2014
From: ucfagls at gmail.com (Gavin Simpson)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:34:31 -0600
Subject: [Rd] Re R CMD check checking in development version of R
In-Reply-To: <53FE5AC6.5000209@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
References: <CAAHES9yzPkidSVAW6=BE689mrfo7Bv_MHZ=WzanHwpctGC21Tg@mail.gmail.com>
	<534513610.2281174.1409177392064.JavaMail.root@fhcrc.org>
	<CAAHES9x+oDdtE3-Qs5OmDSiFg9213GL7+YHHo4UQjXT6W4jTQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<53FE5AC6.5000209@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
Message-ID: <CAAHES9x0iaEcueaZgOJ2LefzXUccu0oO5ZoxE09JT6DW4ANUYA@mail.gmail.com>

On 27 August 2014 16:25, Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> wrote:
<snip />

> Again, I am happy to be re-educated on this though :-)
>>
>
> If you like, you can fill the search path with lots of packages (and make
> masking of functions more likely), but you shoudl really import into your
> namesoace so that unanticipated order of packages in your search path won't
> break your package.
>
> Best,
> Uwe Ligges
>

I do already do that (well, I had missed a few which R-devel CMD check
showed to me). I have a corresponding importFrom(vegan, ....) in my
NAMESPACE even with Depends: vegan in DESCRIPTION.

What I'm pushing back on is the notion that *no* packages should be in
Depends.

Cheers,

G

-- 
Gavin Simpson, PhD

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]



[Rd] Re R CMD check checking in development version of R
Gavin Simpson