From ldimitro at wfubmc.edu  Mon Jan 14 18:26:59 2008
From: ldimitro at wfubmc.edu (Latchezar (Lucho) Dimitrov)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:26:59 -0500
Subject: [Rd] Possible bug in R 2.6.1 (PR#10565)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0801140823560.16045@hymn14.u.washington.edu>
References: <20080114154513.GA15372@phenix.progiciels-bpi.ca>
	<Pine.LNX.4.43.0801140823560.16045@hymn14.u.washington.edu>
Message-ID: <F160BE32A2E5E04497668BBDFE83FEDF2427526C@EXCHVS1.medctr.ad.wfubmc.edu>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: r-devel-bounces at r-project.org 
> [mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-project.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Lumley
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 11:24 AM
> To: Fran?ois Pinard
> Cc: ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk; r-devel at stat.math.ethz.ch
> Subject: Re: [Rd] Possible bug in R 2.6.1 (PR#10565)
> 
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, [iso-8859-1] Fran?ois Pinard wrote:
> 
> > [Brian Ripley]
> >
> >> I do often wonder why people are 'sure you know for certain' (to 
> >> quote the
> >> FAQ) that something as elementary as this would be a bug 
> for so many 
> >> years.  It indicates a lack of respect for the R developers.
> >
> > Not at all.  A bug report may be naive, or even wrong, and still be 
> > driven by good will, and be rightly interpreted as an attempt at a 
> > contribution to both the R community and R developers.
> >
> 
> Brian's point is

  ... and Fran?ois Pinard's is that you should (sic) be more tolerant and forgiving to _your_ users.

BTW, my standing ovations to Fran?ois Pinard excellent language and wordings. I wish I could do it as well :-(


Thanks for understanding,

Latchezar Dimitrov


> that there is an *explicit* request (in both 
> the posting guide and the FAQ) not to send things to R-bugs 
> unless you are *sure* they are bugs.  Queries about 
> *possible* bugs are welcome on r-devel or r-help as appropriate.
> 
> Someone who sends a query about a possible bug to r-bugs has 
> either not read the posting guide or has chosen to ignore the 
> request. It is possible that the request in the posting guide 
> is not sufficiently clear and they just misunderstand it, but 
> I haven't seen anyone claim this. If that's what you mean, 
> then suggestions for making it clearer would be considered.
> 
> If someone presents code  on r-help or r-devel that produces 
> behaviour they don't understand and asks if it is bug (rather 
> than asserting that it must be a bug) they have a much higher 
> chance of receiving a friendly reply [and an even higher 
> chance of receiving a helpful reply]
> 
> 
>     -thomas
> 
> Thomas Lumley			Assoc. Professor, Biostatistics
> tlumley at u.washington.edu	University of Washington, Seattle
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> 



[Rd] Possible bug in R 2.6.1 (PR#10565)
Latchezar (Lucho