From michael.weylandt at gmail.com  Thu Mar 20 13:48:28 2014
From: michael.weylandt at gmail.com (Michael Weylandt)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 08:48:28 -0400
Subject: [Rd] The case for freezing CRAN
In-Reply-To: <3dfcdc$fuu13r@ironport9.mayo.edu>
References: <3dfcdc$fuu13r@ironport9.mayo.edu>
Message-ID: <F6B1E03C-BB62-4B7D-A56C-C94DC934D5FE@gmail.com>

On Mar 20, 2014, at 8:19, "Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D." <therneau at mayo.edu> wrote:

> There is a central assertion to this argument that I don't follow:
> 
>> At the end of the day most published results obtained with R just won't be reproducible.
> 
> This is a very strong assertion. What is the evidence for it?

If I've understood Jeroen correctly, his point might be alternatively phrased as "won't be reproducED" (i.e., end user difficulties, not software availability).

Michael



[Rd] The case for freezing CRAN
Michael Weylandt