[R-pkg-devel] DOI for archived package?

[Iñaki Ucar]

If you proposed
https://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/Archive/<pkg>/<pkg>_<version>.tar.gz
and the editor is suspicious about the "src/contrib/Archive" stuff, you
could propose instead
https://cran.r-project.org/package=<pkg>&version=<version>,
which *looks* more permanent I guess.

Iñaki

On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 18:14, Kevin R. Coombes <kevin.r.coombes using gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am in the process of submitting a "workflow" article about an R
> package (which is onCRAN) to F1000Research. The associate editor that I
> am dealing with wants a "DOI" for the source code of the package being
> described in the manuscript.  I have already explained that CRAN
> archives all versions of packages, and I sent him the URL to the archive
> page for the package, However, he still seems to believe that a DOI
> needs to be assigned by some site like Zenodo.
>
> I haven't yet responded by pointing out that CRAN has been archiving all
> versions of packages since at least the year 2000, it has mirrors all
> over the world, and the URL/URI used here is likely to be far more
> permanent than the DOI from Zenodo. Nor have I pointed out that there
> are more than 15,000 packages at CRAN, nor that not a single R user
> would ever think to go look on Zenodo for an R package.
>
> Does anyone have other suggestions for how to respond? (I know;  I could
> just put the [expletive] thing into Zenodo and move on, but creating a
> permanent identifier for something that will *never *be accessed just
> seems stupid.)
>
> Thanks,
>    Kevin
>
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>


-- 
Iñaki Úcar

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]