> On Dec 22, 2018, at 7:00 AM, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
>
> (since it's fairly unlikely to get two random failures in a row).
Flakey links are also a problem for packages, per se, as opposed to revdeps.
For example, I have a package (oce) that has quite a lot of \url{} items in its
docs, and I get failures quite often. Sometimes the failures will persist
(perhaps intermittently) for days, as work is done on servers, etc. My policy
is to just change \url to \code (usually with a note to tell the user that the
link is actually likely to work), and that's not a good thing, because it leads
to less testing. I do not know what the best policy is ... maybe a new macro
like \checkedurl{} that will make a link if the resource is found, and add a
note about the link failing to work, otherwise. That way, the package could
still build, and the user would not be stuck with a lot of non-linked URLs in
the docs.
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
