From hb at biostat.ucsf.edu  Thu Aug 28 17:41:38 2014
From: hb at biostat.ucsf.edu (Henrik Bengtsson)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 08:41:38 -0700
Subject: [Rd] Re R CMD check checking in development version of R
In-Reply-To: <CACk-te1fEUTzqwEF1EBBtaBTy3QvK13ARr2tOsYjda3Q++_dvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAHES9xbHJLUbzLzS7C2tTaODv=d_JV5ds09ZFdA6Bv+uBSYEA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABdHhvG7ahtFhBOCRU9X2KRR2Z30S1gE_F66m0W=91wpkbvyOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAHES9yzPkidSVAW6=BE689mrfo7Bv_MHZ=WzanHwpctGC21Tg@mail.gmail.com>
	<79381712-FCA3-4995-83BC-956270EDABC4@r-project.org>
	<CACk-te1fEUTzqwEF1EBBtaBTy3QvK13ARr2tOsYjda3Q++_dvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAFDcVCTu7TvkyzhUwdFD5wcdtfGao4T2M39fSTLE0xuQSoAiFw@mail.gmail.com>

>From a developers point of view, these days a less ambiguous name for
'Depends' would be 'Attaches'.

...or maybe even 'ImportsAndAttaches' with 'ImportsOnly' (for 'Imports').

I think Simon phrased it very well, and as others already pointed out,
having one package attaching additional ones certainly has its values. This
is probably more useful for packages that are used directly by the end user
than for packages that mainly provides infrastructure to other packages.

Henrik
On Aug 28, 2014 7:48 AM, "Bert Gunter" <gunter.berton at gene.com> wrote:

> This is a nice explanation of the Imports/Depends distinction. It
> ought to go into the Extensions ref manual imho.
>
> Cheers,
> Bert
>
> Bert Gunter
> Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
> (650) 467-7374
>
> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And knowledge
> is certainly not wisdom."
> Clifford Stoll
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Simon Urbanek
> <simon.urbanek at r-project.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2014, at 6:01 PM, Gavin Simpson <ucfagls at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 27 August 2014 15:24, Hadley Wickham <h.wickham at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Is that the cause of these NOTEs? Is the expectation that if I am
> using a
> >>>> function from a package, even a package that I have in Depends:, that
> I
> >>>> have to explicitly declare these imports in NAMESPACE?
> >>>
> >>> Yes.
> >>>
> >>> (Otherwise your package won't work if it's only attached and not
> >>> loaded. i.e. if someone does analogue::foo() only the imported
> >>> functions are available, not the functions in packages you depend on)
> >>>
> >>
> >> Cheers Hadley. Thanks for the confirmation, but...
> >>
> >> ...I don't get this; what is the point of Depends? I thought it was "my
> >> package needs these other packages to work, i.e. be loaded". Hence it is
> >> user error (IMHO ;-) to do `analogue::foo()` without having the
> >> dependencies loaded too.
> >>
> >
> > No. The point of Depends is that if your package is attached, it also
> attaches the other packages to make them available for the user.
> Essentially you're saying "if you want to use my package interactively, you
> will also want to use those other packages interactively". You still need
> to use import() to define what exactly is used by your package - as opposed
> to what you want to be available to the user in case it is attached.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Simon
> >
> >
> >
> >> This check (whilst having found some things I should have imported and
> >> didn't - which is a good thing!) seems to be circumventing the
> intention of
> >> having something in Depends. Is Depends going to go away?
> >>
> >>
> >>> (And really you shouldn't have any packages in depends, they should
> >>> all be in imports)
> >>
> >>
> >> I disagree with *any*; having say vegan loaded when one is using
> analogue
> >> is a design decision as the latter borrows heavily from and builds upon
> >> vegan. In general I have moved packages that didn't need to be in
> Depends
> >> into Imports; in the version I am currently doing final tweaks on
> before it
> >> goes to CRAN I have remove all but vegan from Depends.
> >>
> >> Or am I thinking about this in the wrong way?
> >>
> >> Thanks again
> >>
> >> Gavin
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Hadley
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> http://had.co.nz/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gavin Simpson, PhD
> >>
> >>       [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> >>
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]



[Rd] Re R CMD check checking in development version of R
Henrik Bengtsson