On 08.06.2020 16:52, Spencer Graves wrote:
Hi, Uwe et al.:


      What's the preferred way to eliminate tests on CRAN that the maintainer still wants to run on other platforms?


      For several years, I've been using "if(!fda::CRAN()){...}". I've been told that I should NOT do that, but it has worked for me, and I haven't found anything better.  I've recently seen "testthat::skip_on_cran(...)", but I have yet to understand enough of how it works to actually use it.


Nor do I how they can find out, as our idea is that CRAN cannot be special cased. If you want to run additional tests, you can execute them if some env var is set that you define on machines where you want to run the additional tests.

Best,
Uwe Ligges





       Thanks,
       Spencer Graves


On 2020-06-08 09:43, stefano wrote:
Hello Uwe,

OK sorry for that.

Best wishes.

*Stefano *



Stefano Mangiola | Postdoctoral fellow

Papenfuss Laboratory

The Walter Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research

+61 (0)466452544


Il giorno mar 9 giu 2020 alle ore 00:40 Uwe Ligges <
lig...@statistik.tu-dortmund.de> ha scritto:


On 08.06.2020 16:26, stefano wrote:
Hello,

I would like to point out that I (and others in various forums) find that
the CRAN check with the note :


*checking CRAN incoming feasibility ... NOTEMaintainer*

Not true, it also says

Flavor: r-devel-windows-ix86+x86_64
Check: running examples for arch 'x64', Result: NOTE
    Examples with CPU (user + system) or elapsed time > 10s
                              user system elapsed
    lower_triangular-methods 11.48      0    11.5

Please reduce each example to less than 5 sec.

Best,
Uwe Ligges
Triggers an email saying


1) *package nanny_0.1.7.tar.gz does not pass the incoming checks
automatically*

2) *Please fix all problems and resubmit a fixed version via the webform*


While apparently nothing should be done, at least according to some forum
post

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/23829978/checking-cran-incoming-feasibility-note-maintainer
It would be nice to avoid this from the test side or the email side. It
is
pretty confusing for developers who think that they have to act.


Best wishes.

*Stefano *



Stefano Mangiola | Postdoctoral fellow

Papenfuss Laboratory

The Walter Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research

+61 (0)466452544

       [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

______________________________________________
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

______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel

Reply via email to