From murdoch.duncan at gmail.com  Sat Sep 14 15:04:12 2013
From: murdoch.duncan at gmail.com (Duncan Murdoch)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:04:12 -0400
Subject: [Rd] declaring package dependencies
In-Reply-To: <21043.13956.782639.908682@max.nulle.part>
References: <5231C3E3.3050007@yorku.ca> <5231FBD9.6050802@gmail.com>
	<523305BB.7090802@yorku.ca> <52331857.8090904@gmail.com>
	<21043.7886.743370.944182@max.nulle.part>
	<52332351.4070001@gmail.com>
	<21043.10494.783658.895362@max.nulle.part>
	<52333264.10602@gmail.com>
	<21043.13956.782639.908682@max.nulle.part>
Message-ID: <52345ECC.7090407@gmail.com>

On 13-09-13 12:00 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 13 September 2013 at 11:42, Paul Gilbert wrote:
> | On 13-09-13 11:02 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > It's not so much Rcpp itself or my 20-ish packages but the fact that we (as
> | > in the Rcpp authors) now stand behind an API that also has to accomodate
> | > changes in R CMD check. Case in point is current (unannounced) change that
> | > makes all Depends: Rcpp become Imports: Rcpp because of the NAMESPACE checks.
> |
> | I am a bit confused by this Dirk, so maybe I am missing something. I
> | think this is still a "Note" in R-devel so you do have some time to make
> | the change, at least several months, maybe more. It is not quite what I
> | think of as an "announcement", more like a shot across the bow, but it
> | is also not "unannounced".
>
> One package author [as in user of Rcpp and not an author of it] was told by
> CRAN this week to change his package and came to me for help -- so in that
> small way the CRAN "non-communication policy" is already creating more work
> for me, and makes me look silly as "I don't document what Rcpp-using packages
> need" as I sadly still lack the time machine or psychic powers to infer what
> may get changed this weekend.
>
> | More importantly, I don't think that the requirement is necessarily to
> | change Depends: Rcpp to Imports: Rcpp, the requirement is to put
> | imports(Rcpp) in the NAMESPACE file. I think this is so that the package
> | continues to work even if the user does something with the search path.
> | The decision to change Depends: Rcpp to Imports: Rcpp really depends on
> | whether the package author wants Rcpp functions to be available directly
>
> Rcpp is a bit of an odd-ball as you mostly need it at compile-time, and you
> require very few R-level functions (but there is package initialization etc
> pp).  We also only about two handful of functions, and those are for
> functionality not all 135 packages use (eg Modules etc).
>
> But the focus here should not be on my hobby package. The focus needs to be
> on how four CRAN maintainers (who do a boatload of amazing work which is
> _truly_ appreciated in its thoroughness and reach) could make the life of
> authors of 4800+ packages easier by communicating and planning a tad more.

Let me paraphrase that:  "The CRAN maintainers do a lot of work, and it 
helps me a lot, but if they only did a little bit more work it would 
help me even more."

I suspect they'd be more receptive to suggestions that had them doing 
less work, not more.

Duncan Murdoch

>
> | by users without them needing to specifically attach Rcpp. They are
> | available with Depends but with Imports they are just used internally in
> | the package.
> |
> | So, one of us is confused. Usually it is me.
>
> No, no, I usually keep you company.
>
> Dirk
>



[Rd] declaring package dependencies
Duncan Murdoch