Skip to content

[Bioc-devel] Contradicting descriptions of "Enhances"

3 messages · Dan Tenenbaum, Martin Maechler, Don Armstrong

Original
Dan Tenenbaum
# 
----- Original Message -----
This is backwards, maybe just a grammar fail? IMO it should say "the 'Enhances' field lists packages which 'enhance' the package at hand, if they are present."
IMO R-exts should be corrected along the lines I suggest above (and R-devel is the appropriate place for such a suggestion); however, the text on the bioc site is also probably less than ideal (will confer with bioc core as to how to rewrite it). Rmpi and parallel are not _always_ "take it or leave it" packages. Other than the grammar blooper, R-exts goes on to give more detailed and correct information, the most important bit of which is that all invocations of packages in enhances should be wrapped in 

if (require(somePkg)).

Dan
Martin Maechler
# 
> ----- Original Message -----
    >> From: "Jonathan Rosenblatt" <john.ros.work at gmail.com> To:
    >> bioc-devel at r-project.org Sent: Sunday, August 3, 2014
    >> 10:39:57 PM Subject: [Bioc-devel] Contradicting
    >> descriptions of "Enhances"
    >> 
    >> At the time of writing:
    >> 
    >> *Writing R Extensions:* "...the ?Enhances? field lists
    >> packages ?enhanced? by the package at hand..."


    > This is backwards, maybe just a grammar fail? IMO it
    > should say "the 'Enhances' field lists packages which
    > 'enhance' the package at hand, if they are present."

I don't think so!
Dan, what you describe is basically 'Suggests'.  'Enhances' is
used more rarely, and indeed meant for what it says in WRE.

Otherwise, please bring this to the R-devel m.list.

    >> *Bioconductor:* "Enhances: is for packages such as Rmpi
    >> or parallel that enhance the performance of the current
    >> package, but are not strictly needed for its
    >> functionality."

and the above is not correct, IMO.

Martin

    >> Have these definitions been resolved?
    >> 

    > IMO R-exts should be corrected along the lines I suggest
    > above (and R-devel is the appropriate place for such a
    > suggestion); however, the text on the bioc site is also
    > probably less than ideal (will confer with bioc core as to
    > how to rewrite it). Rmpi and parallel are not _always_
    > "take it or leave it" packages. Other than the grammar
    > blooper, R-exts goes on to give more detailed and correct
    > information, the most important bit of which is that all
    > invocations of packages in enhances should be wrapped in

    > if (require(somePkg)).

    > Dan



    >> 
    >> 
    >> --
    >> --
    >> Jonathan Rosenblatt Postdoctoral Researcher Faculty of
    >> Mathematics and CS Weizmann Institute of Science
    >> www.john-ros.com
    >> 
    >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
    >> 
    >> 
    >> _______________________________________________
    >> Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
    >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
    >> 

    > _______________________________________________
    > Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
    > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
Don Armstrong
#
On Mon, 04 Aug 2014, Martin Maechler wrote:
Right. If A would Suggests: B, it's also acceptable for B to Enhances:
A. This terminology was lifted wholesale from Debian's packaging fields,
and retained the original meanings as much as possible.