From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com  Tue Jan 18 18:13:52 2011
From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves)
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:13:52 -0800
Subject: [Rd] R vs. C now rather: how to ease package checking
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=SHHMr7pRc7zQOfX95d19+nCfhPqwjL1GNF7Oi@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikbHjP7JvwfWjSaWds7fa4Ek=8LEo14h-Rm5igq@mail.gmail.com>	<19764.34512.640668.433147@max.nulle.part>	<891858.34031.qm@web113714.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>	<4D3493B2.2070907@structuremonitoring.com>	<AANLkTim1jCxVaPLoES_7JZ+0OxeGtAGGReHNFLSOFaPU@mail.gmail.com>	<4D34AD52.20704@structuremonitoring.com>	<6441154A9FF1CD4386AF4ABF141A056D2150F03C@WMEXOSCD2-N2.bocad.bank-banque-canada.ca>	<4D34BF78.7040301@structuremonitoring.com>	<AANLkTi=c961At6WL16g1kBmPgzpfGcPGabWdPG2=bhP9@mail.gmail.com>	<4D34D807.4020004@structuremonitoring.com>	<AANLkTim=ZhYg-X-cvQX=W25c3nY3v5AtmjBFA5Ec8F8+@mail.gmail.com>	<4D356200.6060004@units.it>
	<AANLkTi=SHHMr7pRc7zQOfX95d19+nCfhPqwjL1GNF7Oi@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D35CA50.1070709@structuremonitoring.com>

On 1/18/2011 8:44 AM, Dominick Samperi wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Claudia Beleites<cbeleites at units.it>wrote:
>
>> On 01/18/2011 01:13 AM, Dominick Samperi wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Spencer Graves<
>>> spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>   Hi, Dominick, et al.:
>>>>
>>>>       Demanding complete unit test suites with all software contributed to
>>>> CRAN would likely cut contributions by a factor of 10 or 100.  For me,
>>>> the R
>>>> package creation process is close to perfection in providing a standard
>>>> process for documentation with places for examples and test suites of
>>>> various kinds.  I mention "perfection", because it makes developing
>>>> "trustworthy software" (Chamber's "prime directive") relatively easy
>>>> without
>>>> forcing people to do things they don't feel comfortable doing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I don't think I made myself clear, sorry. I was not suggesting that
>>> package
>>> developers include a complete unit
>>> test suite. I was suggesting that unit testing should be done outside of
>>> the
>>> CRAN release process. Packages
>>> should be submitted for "release" to CRAN after they have been tested (the
>>> responsibility of the package
>>> developers). I understand that the main problem here is that package
>>> developers do not have access to
>>> all supported platforms, so the current process is not likely to change.
>>>
>> Regarding access to all platforms: But there's r-forge where building and
>> checks are done nightly for Linux, Win, and Mac (though for some months now
>> the check protocols are not available for 32 bit Linux and Windows - but I
>> hope they'll be back soon).
>> I found it extremely easy to get an account&  project space and building.
>> Many thanks to r-forge!
>>
> Good point Claudia,
>
> There are packages released to CRAN that
> do not build on some platforms because the unit tests fail. It seems to me
> that this kind of issue could be ironed out with the help of r-forge before
> release, in which case there is no need to run the unit tests for released
> packages.
>
> Dominick

CRAN also runs "R CMD check" on its contributed packages.  I've found 
problems (and fixed) that I couldn't replicate by reviewing the repeated 
checks on both R-Forge and CRAN.


Spencer

> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
>


-- 
Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
President and Chief Operating Officer
Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
751 Emerson Ct.
San Jos?, CA 95126
ph:  408-655-4567



[Rd] R vs. C now rather: how to ease package checking
Spencer Graves