[R-pkg-devel] Spelling and manual CRAN inspection

[Jeff Newmiller]

Spelling has different importance to different people. You are expressing a value judgement that differs from the values of R Core, but are presenting your opinion as if they are facts. My point is that your challenging attitude IMO makes having a conversation about those concerns difficult. (I am not associated with R Core in any way, and do in fact empathize with your frustration with the process.)

I think it is worth pointing out that spelling errors in the DESCRIPTION file are of greater significance than other areas of a package as they can affect assignment of responsibility and permissions, as well as reflecting poorly on the CRAN summary web pages. I suspect that problems with DESCRIPTION files in the past lead to this requirement.

I would encourage you to pause for a day or two before sending off messages like this in the future... a lesson I have learned the hard way myself.

On July 16, 2021 9:08:27 AM PDT, "Kevin R. Coombes" <kevin.r.coombes using gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>  I have been updating a couple of R packages this morning. One of them
>triggered a manual inspection for "possibly mis-spelled words in
>DESCRIPTION" for my last name (Coombes) --- even though none of the
>other 20 packages that I maintain has ever triggered that particular
>NOTE. A second package also triggered a manual inspection for
>mis-spelled words including "Proteomics". (These flags only arose on
>the
>debian CRAN machine, not the Windows CRAN machine, and not on my home
>machines. And let's ignore how many spelling corrections I had to make
>while typing this email)
>
>*My question, however, is: why should this NOTE ever trigger a manual
>inspection?* That makes more work for the CRAN maintainers, who I am
>sure have better things to do than evaluate spelling. Anything that
>would actually stop the package from working (mis-spelling a keyword,
>or
>mis-spelling the name of package that is imported) is going to cause an
>automatic ERROR and a rejection of the submission without making more
>work for the CRAN maintainers. The other mis-spellings may reflect
>poorly on the package author, but since they are NOTEs, it is easy
>enough to get them fixed for the next round without making human
>eyeballs look at them.
>
>Best,
>    Kevin
>
>______________________________________________
>R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel

-- 
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.