On 19/09/2012 10:08 AM, Terry Therneau wrote:
> In general, as a package user, I don't want people to be able to
> suppress checks on CRAN. I want things fixed.
>
> So I am pretty sure there won't ever be a reliable "CRAN-detector" put
> into R. It would devalue the brand.
>
> Duncan Murdoch
My problem is that CRAN demands that I suppress a large fraction of my checks,
in order to
fit within time constraints. This leaves me with 3 choices.
1. Add lines to my code that tries to guess if CRAN is invoker. A cat and
mouse game per
your desire above.
2. Remove large portions of my test suite. I consider the survival package to
be one of
the pre-eminent current code sets in the world precisely because of the
extensive
validations, this action would change it to a second class citizen.
3. Add a magic environment variable to my local world, only do the full tests
if it is
present, and make the dumbed down version the default. Others who want to run
the full
set are then SOL, which I very much don't like.
I agree that CRAN avoidence, other than the time constraint, should be
verboten. But I
don't think that security through obscurity is the answer. And note that under
scenario
3, which is essentially what is currently being forced on us, I can do such
micshief as
easily as under number 1.
Terry Therneau
I understand the issue with time constraints on checks, and I think
there are discussions in progress about that. My suggestion has been to
put in place a way for a tester to say that checks need to be run within
a tight time limit, and CRAN as tester will do that in cases where it
cares about the timing.
But even with the current (or past, it may have changed already)
behaviour of tight limits for CRAN testing, you can put in code in your
package that allows for longer tests in certain conditions. You'll run
them, and if you advertise them, others will run them too.
Duncan Murdoch
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
