[R-pkg-devel] Submitting CRAN packages with hard-to-meet dependencies

[Oliver Keyes]

I must have missed the bit where anyone mentioned Title Case.

CRAN's rules are definitely solid the vast majority of the time, and I've
opted for a GitHub/devtools based release.

On Wednesday, 20 April 2016, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org> wrote:

>
> On 18 April 2016 at 20:48, boB Rudis wrote:
> | So, how do we create a solid alternative to CRAN? github drat wld have
> | been impossible at my previous gig (for good reasons). Is it time to
> | try to get rOpenSci to be a legit CRAN alternative? Add enough process
> | around it to support things like this (i.e. a less narrowly focused
> | Bioconductor)? Package complexities are only going to grow, not
> | shrink. Such is this brave, new data science world we live in.
>
> You are just talking the talk which is cheap and doesn't get us anywhere.
> If
> you believe so strongly that this needs to be done, can you not rent a few
> gb
> of diskspace on S3 and get going?  Walk the walk!
>
> I (greatly) appreciate what CRAN has done for us, and continues to do for
> us. It is a gift economy, and with their free labour we get their rules,
> for
> better (mostly) or worse (rarely).  I happen to disagree with one or two
> minor aspects and may end up putting a support package or two onto a github
> drat rather than CRAN itself.  But as I continue to benefit greatly from
> CRAN
> as both a user and as a package author, I am (mostly) happy to cooperate.
> They have executed a pretty relentless drive for higher code quality, more
> and better code checks, better licensing conformance and more.
>
> And I honestly don't give a damn if some Brooklyn or Portland hipsters
> complain about Title Case nagging as that too has merit (as it makes
> aggregation pages more readable).
>
> <end of rant>
>
> Dirk
>
> --
> http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org
> <javascript:;>
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]