From jo@|@h@p@rry @end|ng |rom gm@||@com  Fri Dec 13 20:50:42 2024
From: jo@|@h@p@rry @end|ng |rom gm@||@com (Josiah Parry)
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:50:42 -0800
Subject: [Rd] Check R version dependency in R CMD Check
In-Reply-To: <CA+6hu7eMvwn_BxHm_h6WXgZx979gQywUDPcbexgQJQtQ4dZqBw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+6hu7eMvwn_BxHm_h6WXgZx979gQywUDPcbexgQJQtQ4dZqBw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL3ufU+P6Ov1+m-Y=jvmRwC04aCgF1Na3raBpuSMV3ghO6-MjQ@mail.gmail.com>

I?ve been guilty of this myself. I think a check would be good.

In my case I was using the new sort_by() function (I think also 4.1) and a
user was failing to install on R 4.0.


On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 11:30 Jan Net?k <netikja at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have a server with R 3.6.3 installed and I struggled a bit with
> updating several R packages that utilizes some new syntax introduced in R
> 4.1.0, such as the native pipe |> or function definition shorthand \(x) ...
>
> The thing is that these packages states "Depends: R (>= 3.6.0)" and pass R
> CMD Check without any issues. My problem occurred at the installation time.
> I can see that developers naturally include the new handy syntax but
> oftentimes forget to raise R version dependency in their DESCRIPTIONs.
> Should we employ some new checks?
>
> Best,
> Jan
>
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]



[Rd] Check R version dependency in R CMD Check
Josiah Parry