This is great news Roman.
The "rth" role stands for "Research team head", and I got it from the
http://www.loc.gov/marc//relators/relaterm.html website.
This issue here is Diane Catellier provided the funds and management for us to
develop this package. I did not know about the person() function. When I
looked at the help page for person(), I see that I can use "fnd" for funder and
that will define Diane's role sufficiently well. I'll make the change and run
through my checks again.
Thank you,
Barry
-----Original Message-----
From: Roman Flury <roman.fl...@math.uzh.ch>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 5:27 PM
To: Eggleston, Barry <beggles...@rti.org>
Cc: Hugh Parsonage <hugh.parson...@gmail.com>; r-package-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Get an empty note for "checking DESCRIPTION
meta-information" when I run devtools::build_win()
Barry,
sorry did not anticipate the behaving of the emailer. I could reproduce your
error with the DESCRIPTION file below with a helloworld pkg
Package: test
Type: Package
Title: What the Package Does (Title Case)
Version: 0.1.0
Authors@R: c(person("Roman", "Flury", email = "roman.fl...@math.uzh.ch", role =
c("aut", "cre")),
person("Test", "person", email = "testm...@test.org", role =
c("fnd", "rth")))
Description: Short description to describe this package.
Depends: R (>= 3.5.0)
License: GPL-3
Encoding: UTF-8
LazyData: true
Imports: eha (>= 2.5.1),
ggplot2 (>= 2.2.1),
survival (>= 2.41-3),
reshape2 (>= 1.4.3),
stats (>= 3.5.0)
RoxygenNote: 6.0.1
this passes R CMD check --as-cran on a unix system, but not on windwos.
The problem seems to be the role "rth", which is also not listed in ?person.
What does this role stand for?
best, Roman
On 25.07.2018 16:21, Eggleston, Barry wrote:
> Roman,
>
> Not sure why my emailer added all those <mailto:a...@bbb.ccc> items, but none
> of them are in my original DESCRIPTION file. So my Maintainer line, for
> example, simply reads Barry Eggleston <email address>, where email address is
> simply beggles...@rti.org.
>
> Thanks for the observation,
> Barry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roman Flury <roman.fl...@math.uzh.ch>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 9:42 AM
> To: Eggleston, Barry <beggles...@rti.org>
> Cc: Hugh Parsonage <hugh.parson...@gmail.com>;
> r-package-devel@r-project.org
> Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Get an empty note for "checking DESCRIPTION
> meta-information" when I run devtools::build_win()
>
> Hello,
>
> after https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-exts.html the
> ‘Maintainer’ field should give a single name followed by a valid (RFC 2822)
> email address in angle brackets.
> but beggles...@rti.org<mailto:beggles...@rti.org> is not a valid RFC
> 2822 email address, you could check this for instance with
> https://proxy2.de/email-validation.php
>
> you could omit the 'Maintainer' field, since a suitable ‘Authors@R’ field is
> given..
> does this solve your problem?
>
> best, Roman
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eggleston, Barry" <beggles...@rti.org>
> To: "Hugh Parsonage" <hugh.parson...@gmail.com>
> Cc: r-package-devel@r-project.org
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 3:00:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Get an empty note for "checking DESCRIPTION
> meta-information" when I run devtools::build_win()
>
> Below is a copy of my DESCRIPTION file:
>
> Package: BayesCTDesign
> Type: Package
> Title: Two Arm Bayesian Clinical Trial Design with and Without
> Historical Control Data
> Version: 1.0.0
> Authors@R: c(
> person("Barry", "Eggleston", email =
> "beggles...@rti.org<mailto:beggles...@rti.org>", role = c("cre", "aut")),
> person("Doug", "Wilson", email =
> "doug.roy.wil...@gmail.com<mailto:doug.roy.wil...@gmail.com>", role =
> c("aut")),
> person("Becky", "McNeil", email =
> "rmcn...@rti.org<mailto:rmcn...@rti.org>", role = c("aut")),
> person("Joseph", "Ibrahim", email =
> "jibra...@email.unc.edu<mailto:jibra...@email.unc.edu>", role = c("aut")),
> person("Diane", "Catellier", email =
> "dcatell...@rti.org<mailto:dcatell...@rti.org>", role = c("fnd",
> "rth")))
> Maintainer: Barry Eggleston
> <beggles...@rti.org<mailto:beggles...@rti.org>>
> Description: A set of functions to help clinical trial researchers calculate
> power and sample size for two-arm Bayesian randomized clinical trials that do
> or do not incorporate historical control data. At some point during the
> design process, a clinical trial researcher who is designing a basic two-arm
> Bayesian randomized clinical trial needs to make decisions about power and
> sample size within the context of hypothesized treatment effects. Through
> simulation, the \code{simple_sim()} function will estimate power and other
> user specified clinical trial characteristics at user specified sample sizes
> given user defined scenarios about treatment effect,control group
> characteristics, and outcome. If the clinical trial researcher has access to
> historical control data, then the researcher can design a two-arm Bayesian
> randomized clinical trial that incorporates the historical data. In such a
> case, the researcher needs to work through the potential consequences of
> historical and randomiz ed control differences on trial characteristics, in
> addition to working through issues regarding power in the context of sample
> size, treatment effect size, and outcome. If a researcher designs a clinical
> trial that will incorporate historical control data, the researcher needs the
> randomized controls to be from the same population as the historical
> controls. What if this is not the case when the designed trial is
> implemented? During the design phase, the researcher needs to investigate
> the negative effects of possible historic/randomized control differences on
> power, type one error, and other trial characteristics. Using this
> information, the researcher should design the trial to mitigate these
> negative effects. Through simulation, the \code{historic_sim()} function
> will estimate power and other user specified clinical trial characteristics
> at user specified sample sizes given user defined scenarios about historical
> and randomized control differences as well as treatment effec ts and
> outcomes. The results from \code{historic_sim()} and \code{simple_sim()} can
> be printed with \code{print_table()} and graphed with \code{plot_table()}
> methods. Outcomes considered are Gaussian, Poisson, Bernoulli, Lognormal,
> Weibull, and Piecewise Exponential.
> Depends: R (>= 3.5.0)
> License: GPL-3
> Encoding: UTF-8
> LazyData: true
> Imports: eha (>= 2.5.1),
> ggplot2 (>= 2.2.1),
> survival (>= 2.41-3),
> reshape2 (>= 1.4.3),
> stats (>= 3.5.0)
> RoxygenNote: 6.0.1
>
>
> From: Hugh Parsonage <hugh.parson...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2018 10:12 PM
> To: Eggleston, Barry <beggles...@rti.org>
> Cc: r-package-devel@r-project.org
> Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Get an empty note for "checking DESCRIPTION
> meta-information" when I run devtools::build_win()
>
> Thank you. Could you provide the contents of DESCRIPTION too? That might
> provide the richest clue. If you have a link to an online copy of the package
> that could be helpful too.
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 at 12:01 Eggleston, Barry
> <beggles...@rti.org<mailto:beggles...@rti.org>> wrote:
> I am working through my first package submission. When I checked my package
> using devtools::build_win(), I got no errors and two notes. One note is
> simply the expected note that my package is a new submission. My second note
> involves DESCRIPTION meta-information, but nothing is printed so I don't know
> what to focus on. I have copied the important parts of my 00check.log from
> CRAN below for context. What areas of my DESCRIPTION file might create such
> an empty note? Thanks in advance for any help you might give me.
>
> * checking CRAN incoming feasibility ... NOTE
> Maintainer: 'Barry Eggleston
> <beggles...@rti.org<mailto:beggles...@rti.org><mailto:beggles...@rti.org<mailto:beggles...@rti.org>>>'
>
> New submission
> * checking package namespace information ... OK
> * checking package dependencies ... OK
> * checking if this is a source package ... OK
> * checking if there is a namespace ... OK
> * checking for hidden files and directories ... OK
> * checking for portable file names ... OK
> * checking whether package 'BayesCTDesign' can be installed ... OK
> * checking installed package size ... OK
> * checking package directory ... OK
> * checking DESCRIPTION meta-information ... NOTE
>
> * checking top-level files ... OK
> * checking for left-over files ... OK
> * checking index information ... OK
> * checking package subdirectories ... OK
> * checking R files for non-ASCII characters ... OK
> * checking R files for syntax errors ... OK
> * loading checks for arch 'i386'
> ** checking whether the package can be loaded ... OK
> ** checking whether the package can be loaded with stated dependencies
> ... OK
> ** checking whether the package can be unloaded cleanly ... OK
> ** checking whether the namespace can be loaded with stated
> dependencies ... OK
> ** checking whether the namespace can be unloaded cleanly ... OK
> ** checking loading without being on the library search path ... OK
> ** checking use of S3 registration ... OK
> * loading checks for arch 'x64'
> ** checking whether the package can be loaded ... OK
> ** checking whether the package can be loaded with stated dependencies
> ... OK
> ** checking whether the package can be unloaded cleanly ... OK
> ** checking whether the namespace can be loaded with stated
> dependencies ... OK
> ** checking whether the namespace can be unloaded cleanly ... OK
> ** checking loading without being on the library search path ... OK
> ** checking use of S3 registration ... OK
> * checking dependencies in R code ... OK
> * checking S3 generic/method consistency ... OK
> * checking replacement functions ... OK
> * checking foreign function calls ... OK
> * checking R code for possible problems ... [41s] OK
> * checking Rd files ... OK
> * checking Rd metadata ... OK
> * checking Rd line widths ... OK
> * checking Rd cross-references ... OK
> * checking for missing documentation entries ... OK
> * checking for code/documentation mismatches ... OK
> * checking Rd \usage sections ... OK
> * checking Rd contents ... OK
> * checking for unstated dependencies in examples ... OK
> * checking examples ...
> ** running examples for arch 'i386' ... [19s] OK
> ** running examples for arch 'x64' ... [22s] OK
> * checking PDF version of manual ... OK
> * DONE
> Status: 2 NOTEs
>
> Barry
>
>
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel@r-project.org<mailto:R-package-devel@r-project.org>
> mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
