[R-pkg-devel] Versioning conventions

David Hugh-Jones d@vidhughjone@ @ending from gm@il@com
Tue Jul 10 15:59:50 CEST 2018

Hi all,

Just updated my rcheology package with data on functions for R 3.5.1 (no
change from R 3.5.0 afaik). See https://github.com/hughjonesd/rcheology.

I'm wondering how to version this package. It's not on CRAN yet so it would
be good to get things right.


* Just copy the R versions, so the new version would be 3.5.1
Advantages: easy to understand. Disadvantages: semantic versioning would
follow R, not the package itself (which does contain a single function with
a public API); what if I make changes between R releases.
* ownversion.major.minor-Rversion.major.minor e.g. 0.1.0-3.5.1
Advantages: shows the R version clearly, contains own semantic versioning
information. Disadvantages: long.
* ownversion.major.minor-Rversionmajorminor e.g. 0.1.0-351
Advantage: as above but shorter. Disadvantages: if we hit e.g. 3.10.0, then
go back to 4.0.0, then we'd end up going backward in the last component.

Any ideas?


	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

More information about the R-package-devel mailing list