From ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de  Tue Mar 27 17:25:31 2012
From: ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de (Uwe Ligges)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:25:31 +0200
Subject: [Rd] CRAN policies
In-Reply-To: <CAP01uRmFHCHPkSX=7WHUo+yWEGum0u3910qJLSqFzf95ndkqBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4F71A2F3.2000203@stats.ox.ac.uk> <4F71AA0A.9050702@stats.ox.ac.uk>
	<CAP01uRmFHCHPkSX=7WHUo+yWEGum0u3910qJLSqFzf95ndkqBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4F71DBEB.2010508@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>



On 27.03.2012 17:09, Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Prof Brian Ripley
> <ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk>  wrote:
>> CRAN has for some time had a policies page at
>> http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html
>> and we would like to draw this to the attention of package maintainers.  In
>> particular, please
>>
>> - always send a submission email to CRAN at r-project.org with the package
>> name and version on the subject line.  Emails sent to individual members of
>> the team will result in delays at best.
>>
>> - run R CMD check --as-cran on the tarball before you submit it.  Do
>> this with the latest version of R possible: definitely R 2.14.2,
>> preferably R 2.15.0 RC or a recent R-devel.  (Later versions of R are
>> able to give better diagnostics, e.g. for compiled code and especially
>> on Windows. They may also have extra checks for recently uncovered
>> problems.)
>>
>> Also, please note that CRAN has a very heavy workload (186 packages were
>> published last week) and to remain viable needs package maintainers to make
>> its life as easy as possible.
>>
>
> Regarding the part about "warnings or significant notes" in that page,
> its impossible to know which notes are significant and which ones are
> not significant except by trial and error.


Right, it needs human inspection to identify false positives. We believe 
most package maintainers are able to see if he or she is hit by such a 
false positive.

Uwe Ligges



[Rd] CRAN policies
Uwe Ligges