Message-ID: <52CA86D9-E784-48DC-ACFB-8E286F1D0BFF@gmail.com>
Date: 2014-03-21T02:19:52Z
From: Tim Triche, Jr.
Subject: [RFC] A case for freezing CRAN
In-Reply-To: <CABtg=K=HozOjgCFJVQ4=CF1L2seZi74-=8FuaYtVn+5y7v01cQ@mail.gmail.com>
Heh, you just described BioC
--t
> On Mar 20, 2014, at 7:15 PM, G?bor Cs?rdi <csardi.gabor at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:45 PM, William Dunlap <wdunlap at tibco.com> wrote:
>
>>> In particular, updating a package with many reverse dependencies is a
>>> frustrating process, for everybody. As a maintainer with ~150 reverse
>>> dependencies, I think not twice, but ten times if I really want to
>> publish
>>> a new version on CRAN.
>>
>> It might be easier if more of those packages came with good test suites.
>
> Test suites are great, but I don't think this would make my job easier.
> More tests means more potential breakage. The extreme of not having any
> examples and tests in these 150 packages would be the easiest for _me_,
> actually. Not for the users, though.....
>
> What would really help is either fully versioned package dependencies
> (daydreaming here), or having a CRAN-devel repository, that changes and
> might break often, and a CRAN-stable that does not change (much).
>
> Gabor
>
> [...]
>
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel