[R-pkg-devel] DESCRIPTION file corrections for accepted package

[Duncan Murdoch]

I don't think R will enforce a 3 part version just because you used it 
once.  You might have other reasons to try to maintain versioning 
consistency.

Duncan Murdoch

On 2024-10-27 7:48 a.m., Gianmarco Alberti wrote:
> Dear Duncan,
> 
> Thank you for the straightforward guidance.
> 
> My initial query stemmed from a concern about versioning consistency - I 
> thought that once using three digits (1.1.1), I would need to maintain 
> that format (e.g., 1.2.0) in future updates. Your suggestion clarified 
> that I can use 1.1.1 for these formatting changes and still use 1.2 for 
> future substantial updates.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Gm
> 
> 
> Il giorno dom 27 ott 2024 alle ore 11:49 Duncan Murdoch 
> <murdoch.duncan using gmail.com <mailto:murdoch.duncan using gmail.com>> ha scritto:
> 
>     On 2024-10-27 6:03 a.m., Gianmarco Alberti wrote:
>      > Dear R Package Developers,
>      > I am seeking guidance regarding a situation with my package
>     'chisquare'
>      > (version 1.1) on CRAN.
>      >
>      > Current situation:
>      >
>      > 1. The package was submitted and (automatically) accepted to CRAN
>     (version
>      > 1.1) after thorough local testing and complete devtools checks
>      > (check_win_oldrelease(), check_win_release(), check_win_devel())
>      >
>      > 2. After acceptance, I received a request to make formatting
>     changes to the
>      > DESCRIPTION file by November 2, 2024:
>      > -Remove version specifications for graphics and stats in Imports
>      > -Update R version dependency format from R (>= 4.0.0) to R (>= 4.0)
>      >
>      > 3. Upon attempting to submit these formatting changes, I received
>     a warning
>      > about "Insufficient package version (submitted: 1.1, existing:
>     1.1)". I am
>      > well aware that this warning typically indicates the need to
>     increment the
>      > version number for new submissions of existing packages, as per CRAN
>      > policies.
>      >
>      > This creates a procedural challenge:
>      > -I need to make the requested DESCRIPTION file changes to retain
>     the package
>      > -The changes are purely formatting-related, not functional (all
>     checks pass)
>      > -I cannot submit without changing the version number
>      > -However, incrementing the version number seems disproportionate for
>      > formatting changes.
>      >
>      > I would greatly appreciate guidance on the proper way to handle this
>      > situation.
>      > What is the recommended approach for submitting DESCRIPTION file
>     formatting
>      > corrections for an already-accepted package, given that
>     incrementing the
>      > version number might seem a bit disproportionate?
>      >
>      > Thank you for your time and assistance.
> 
>     The simplest thing is to just update the version.  Use 1.1.1 if you
>     don't want to go to 1.2.
> 
>     Duncan Murdoch
>