On Thu, May 10, 2018, 00:29 Martin Morgan <martin.mor...@roswellpark.org>
wrote:
> Developers --
>
> A preliminary heads-up and request for comments.
>
> Almost since project inception, we've used the commands
>
> source("https://bioconductor.org/biocLite.R";)
> biocLite(pkgs)
>
> to install packages. This poses security risks (e.g., typos in the url)
> and deviates from standard R package installation procedures.
>
>
> We'd like to move to a different system where a base package, call it
> 'BiocManager', is installed from CRAN and used to install Bioconductor
> packages
>
> if (!"BiocManager" %in% rownames(installed.packages()))
> install.packages("BiocManager")
> BiocManager::install(pkgs)
>
> This establishes a secure chain from user R session to Bioconductor
> package installation. It is also more consistent with base R package
> installation procedures.
>
> BiocManager exposes four functions
>
> - install() or update packages
>
> - version() version of Bioconductor in use
>
> - valid() are all Bioconductor packages from the same Bioconductor
> version?
>
> - repositories() url location for Bioconductor version-specific
> repositories
>
> install() behaves like biocLite(), using the most current version of
> Bioconductor for the version of R in use. It stores this state using a
> Bioconductor package 'BiocVersion', which is nothing more than a
> sentinel for the version in use. One can also 'use devel' or a
> particular version of Bioconductor (consistent with the version of R) with
>
> BiocManager::install(version = "3.8") # or the synonym "devel"
>
>
> We intend to phase this in over several release cycles, and to continue
> to support the traditional biocLite() route for versions before
> BiocManager becomes available.
>
> We also intend to change the overall versioning of 'Bioconductor'
> itself, where releases are always even (3.8, 3.10, 3.12, ...) and
> 'devel' always odd.
>
> Obviously this is a large change, eventually requiring updates to many
> locations on our web site and individual vignettes.
>
>
> Of course the key question is the name of the 'BiocManager' package. It
> cannot easily be 'BiocInstaller', because of the differences in way CRAN
> and Bioconductor version packages. Some possible names are
> '
> BiocInstall::install()
> BiocPackages::install()
> BiocManager
> BiocMaestro
May I suggest the package name:
* Bioconductor
The potential downside would be possible confusions between the version of
this package versus the actual Bioconductor repository. Could the
Bioconductor *package* have a version x.y.z that reflects the *repository*
x.y version?
/Henrik
>
> Your comments are welcome...
>
> Martin
>
>
> This email message may contain legally privileged and/or...{{dropped:2}}
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
