From ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de  Mon Sep 16 11:19:32 2013
From: ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de (Uwe Ligges)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:19:32 +0200
Subject: [Rd] FOSS licence with BuildVignettes: false
In-Reply-To: <loom.20130916T005045-889@post.gmane.org>
References: <077E31A57DA26E46AB0D493C9966AC730D87190EAD@UM-MAIL4112.unimaas.nl>
	<52361636.5060305@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
	<loom.20130916T005045-889@post.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <5236CD24.40107@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>



On 16.09.2013 01:04, Ben Bolker wrote:
> Uwe Ligges <ligges <at> statistik.tu-dortmund.de> writes:
>
>>
>> Setting
>>
>> BuildVignettes: false
>>
>> is fine if it is possible to build the vignettes, and the latter is
>> checked in CRAN incoming checks (but not the daily checks).
>>
>> Uwe Ligges
>
>     Hmmm.  I was told by the CRAN maintainers on Aug 7 that
>
> CRAN> "FOSS licence with BuildVignettes: false" is not a false positive,
> CRAN> is fixable, and is mentioned at
> CRAN> http://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-devel/R-exts.html#
> CRAN>    The-DESCRIPTION-file as not to be used in an FOSS package.
>
>    (I had said in my previous e-mail to CRAN that all NOTEs were
> false positives, minor or not fixable.)  Admittedly this e-mail
> nowhere said explicitly "you must fix this or we will not accept
> it for CRAN", but that was certainly the impression I got.
>
> TFM says
>
> R-exts>   [BuildVignettes: false] should only be used exceptionally, for
> R-exts> example if the PDFs include large figures which are not part of the
> R-exts> package sources (and hence only in packages which do not have an
> R-exts> Open Source license).
>
>     So either I'm confused (always a possibility!) or it seems
> there are some inconsistencies here ...

Yes, and I could see really rare circumstances where vignette building 
takes a long time and the maintainer decides not to build vignettes as 
part of the daily checks.
If there were no possible (but typically rather rare) exceptions, this 
would be at least a Warning.

Best,
Uwe Ligges





>
>> On 15.09.2013 22:13, Viechtbauer Wolfgang (STAT) wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> I have been checking the metafor package against R-devel.
>>>
>>> R CMD check --as-cran metafor
>>>
>>> yields one note:
>>>
>>> FOSS licence with BuildVignettes: false
>>>
>>> Yes, I have 'BuildVignettes: FALSE' in my DESCRIPTION file.
>> I see at http://developer.r-project.org/blosxom.cgi/R-devel/NEWS:
>>>
>>> Tue, 25 Jun 2013
>>> CHANGES IN R-devel UTILITIES
>>>
>>>       'R CMD check --as-cran' warns about a false value
>> of the 'DESCRIPTION' field 'BuildVignettes' for Open
>> Source packages, and ignores it (as an Open Source package
>> needs to have complete sources for its vignettes).
>>>
>>> My questions are:
>>>
>>> 1) Is this going to be an issue if I submit a new
>> version of the metafor package to CRAN right now?
>>>
>>> 2) And if the answer to 1 is "Not right now": Is this going
>> to become an issue in the future? In other words, is
>> it the goal to only allow packages with BuildVignettes=true
>> if they have an FOSS license at some point in
>> the future?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Wolfgang
>>>
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>



[Rd] FOSS licence with BuildVignettes: false
Uwe Ligges