[R-pkg-devel] .tar vs. binary builds

Glenn Schultz glennmschultz at me.com
Tue Aug 4 02:32:04 CEST 2015

Got it thanks - I want to achieve maximum exposure and transparency

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 3, 2015, at 5:10 PM, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 03/08/2015 4:31 PM, Glenn Schultz wrote:
>> Hello All,
>> I have a package which I would like to distribute.  However, there are some classes that are not exported if I provide a tar file can the user decompress the tar to the source and then export class.  I am thinking the answer is year since the tar is source code.  Conversely, a binary build would prohibit this - correct?
> If you distribute a binary file, your package will soon become obsolete:
> they are tied to particular versions of R and particular platforms.
> If you want wide exposure for your package, you should distribute it as
> a source package on CRAN.  It's more work than self-publishing (because
> you need to meet their requirements), but it will improve your package.
> If your package is distributed in any other way, some people (like me)
> will advise against using it at all.
> Duncan Murdoch

More information about the R-package-devel mailing list