From edd at debian.org  Fri Apr 17 16:12:04 2009
From: edd at debian.org (Dirk Eddelbuettel)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:12:04 -0500
Subject: [Rd] suggestion for R >= 3.0: computer-readable CHANGELOG
In-Reply-To: <49E87E85.4050700@stats.uwo.ca>
References: <49E82D9C.9090402@sciviews.org> <49E85C0D.6040809@stats.uwo.ca>
	<49E87A59.2010003@life.ku.dk> <49E87E85.4050700@stats.uwo.ca>
Message-ID: <18920.36404.547796.504974@ron.nulle.part>


On 17 April 2009 at 09:05, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
| That would be a waste of time.  People don't use the package 
| documentation schemes that are in place; why would they use a new one?
 
Because of scattered documentation and lack of best practices?  Many things
are possible with R and packages, how many are really done consistently?  I
think this points to a need for better examples, better docs, and better
package checking tools.

I happended to have the same discussion via email last night with Brian
(CCed) who wanted to see NEWS / Changes in my CRANberries RSS feed for CRAN.
I suggested pretty much what Philippe suggested in the first post in this
thread --- with one addition.  I think we need a test in R CMD check that
emits a warning if there is no inst/NEWS or inst/Changes or inst/Changelog.

Your reminder of the parseable NEWS file was timely.  I would suggest to have
both NEWS (for 'big' events) and Changes (for 'smaller', incremental
changes).     I'd be happy to help code an additional parser Changes and/or
some checks for R CMD check if a consensus emerges that this is doable.  

Dirk


-- 
Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.



[Rd] suggestion for R >= 3.0: computer-readable CHANGELOG
Dirk Eddelbuettel