Thanks Martin for looking into it. I think that is the reason of the problem, the timeline of the errors building certainly match. I couldn't find this documented in Writing R Extensions, is this behavior documented somewhere?
Lluís On 28 February 2018 at 15:03, Martin Morgan <martin.mor...@roswellpark.org> wrote: > Actually, looking at your github repository, I see you have two vignettes, > you have renamed one from vignette2.Rmd to BioCor_advanced.Rmd, and that > this vignette now collates before the original one. I believe that > vignettes are built in the same R process, so the packages loaded in the > first vignette are available (and conflict with) packages loaded in the > second. > > Martin > > > On 02/28/2018 08:53 AM, Martin Morgan wrote: > >> >> >> On 02/28/2018 05:31 AM, Lluís Revilla wrote: >> >>> Dear bioconductor core, >>> >>> The development version of my package hosted in Github cannot be build. >>> It >>> seems that another package is loaded when it shouldn't and masks the >>> functions that are used in the vignette. (In case anyone wants to help >>> here >>> is the link to the StackOverflow question: >>> https://stackoverflow.com/q/49002455/2886003) >>> >> >> This means that 'another package' is on the search() path. It only gets >> there if your package attaches it, directly or indirectly. Maybe another >> package that you attach previously import'ed it, but now depends on it? To >> narrow this down, step through your vignette code until you see the >> offending package on the search() path. >> >> Maybe you can avoid attaching the intermediate package, or put your >> package in front of the others on the search path by loading your package >> last in the vignette. >> >> If you're running into these problems, and you're intimately familiar >> with your package, then one can imagine that users will also run into this >> problem and the suggestion to mangle your package function names starts to >> sound appealing. >> >> >>> Additionally the current version hosted in Bioconductor has a warning in >>> the windows build. Which I hoped to correct for these release. >>> >>> I don't know if I will find a solution on time for the next release >>> (which >>> I expect in three weeks), but I am worried I won't be able to fix it on >>> time. >>> >> >> The next Bioconductor release has not been announced (we try to tie these >> to the R release schedule, and the release of R-3.5 has not yet been >> announced), but will likely be at the end of April. >> >> Martin >> >> >>> The End Of Life page of Bioconductor only talks about errors not >>> warnings, >>> and I couldn't find if this has been discussed previously in the >>> archive. I >>> would like to know if I can leave the development version as is (until I >>> find a solution) or should I aim to correct the warning for the next >>> release? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> Lluís Revilla >>> >>> [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel >>> >>> > > This email message may contain legally privileged and/or confidential > information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the employee or > agent responsible for the delivery of this message to the intended > recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, > distribution, or use of this email message is prohibited. If you have > received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by > e-mail and delete this email message from your computer. Thank you. > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] _______________________________________________ Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
