Skip to content
Back to formatted view

Raw Message

Message-ID: <96cc9a80-bf41-4383-ba5e-cefb8fa4ecaf@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-10-16T09:25:59Z
From: Duncan Murdoch
Subject: [R-pkg-devel] Problem with "additional repository".
In-Reply-To: <20231016143457.4e9abf93@rolf-Latitude-E7470>

Whoops, I just read the next line.  Sorry!

On 15/10/2023 9:34 p.m., Rolf Turner wrote:
> 
> I have submitted a new package to CRAN, and this package has been
> knocked back on the basis of a NOTE:
> 
>> * checking package dependencies ... NOTE
>> Package suggested but not available for checking: 'ionChannelData'
> 
> This suggested package consists of data sets, the size of which is too
> large to satisfy CRAN's constraints. I put this package in a repository
> on github, from which it can be accessed by users.
> 
> My DESCRIPTION file contains the line:
> 
>> Additional_repositories: https://rolfturner.r-universe.dev
> 
> The given URL seems to work, in that users can indeed load the
> ionChannelData package via the command
> 
>> install.packages("ionChannelData",repos="https://rolfturner.r-universe.dev")
> 
> I was under the impression that this was all that I needed to do.  The
> CRAN checking process acknowledges the existence of the repository in
> question:
> 
>> Suggests or Enhances not in mainstream repositories:
>>    ionChannelData
>> Availability using Additional_repositories specification:
>>    ionChannelData   yes   https://rolfturner.r-universe.dev
> 
> So CRAN knows about this repository.  Why can it not make use of it?
> 
> What can/should I do to resolve this problem?
> 
> I guess I could simply *not* Suggest ionChannelData.  But what then, is
> the point of the option of including an Additional_repositories field in
> the DESCRIPTION file?
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Rolf Turner
>