On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 22:40, Ben Bolker <bbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 10/12/20 4:34 PM, Iñaki Ucar wrote: > > You are right. I was too fast and didn't read "last released version". > > Then the only suspicious thing I see is: > > > > Overall checktime 23 min > 10 min > > I agree that's unfortunate, but it doesn't seem grounds for summary > rejection ... ? (CRAN policy says "Checking the package should take as > little CPU time as possible".) You may be right: it does seem to be _de > facto_ policy that any NOTE is grounds for rejection. On the other > hand, this package has had NOTEs about 'installed size is <large>" for a > long time, which hasn't been grounds for rejection.
Large size due to libs. But if data or docs go beyond 5MB, it would probably be rejected. Likewise, I believe checking time is another one of those NOTEs that are really hard lines. -- Iñaki Úcar ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
