[R-pkg-devel] How to handle deprecated package dependency? 2 suggestions 1 question
murdoch@dunc@n @ending from gm@il@com
Mon Jun 25 22:12:56 CEST 2018
On 25/06/2018 3:21 PM, Vincent van Hees wrote:
> Dear all,
> One of my package dependencies was taken from CRAN a month ago, with
> the CRAN message: "...check problems were not corrected despite
> reminders" as displayed on the deprecated CRAN package page. I
> immediately got in touch with the deprecated package maintainer and
> learnt that he is trying to resolve the issue(s).
> My suggestions/questions:
> 1 - Would it be an idea for CRAN to inform reverse dependency package
> maintainers when a package is at risk of being taken from CRAN? For
> example, by cc-ing them in the warning message? I think such a
> heads-up could have helped to prevent the situation.
> 2 - At the moment the CRAN page for the deprecated package does not
> tell me what I can do to help fix the issue:
> "Package ‘GENEAread’ was removed from the CRAN repository.
> Formerly available versions can be obtained from the archive.
> Archived on 2018-05-25 as check problems were not corrected despite reminders >
> Would it be an idea to display what those problems were to make it
> easier for others, like me, to help fix the issue(s)?
I don't know if it will remain indefinitely, but the CRAN check page for
that package is still available, containing MacOS results:
It looks as though the required changes are quite trivial: using
requireNamespace instead of require() or library(), and declaring
imports from base packages.
> 3 - Can you advise on how I can help address the situation, such that
> I can upload a much needed update to my own CRAN package GGIR? The
> approaches I can think of are: (A) Help the deprecated package
> maintainer to fix their issues, which may not be easy, (B) copy the
> old code of the deprecated package and create an entirely new but
> fixed CRAN package from it myself stripped to only the functionality I
> need, which is not ideal of course, or (C) Kindly ask CRAN to put the
> deprecated package back online for a couple of months while we look
> out for a better solution?
Given how easy the fixes are, I'd go with (A).
> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
More information about the R-package-devel