Spelling has different importance to different people. You are expressing a value judgement that differs from the values of R Core, but are presenting your opinion as if they are facts. My point is that your challenging attitude IMO makes having a conversation about those concerns difficult. (I am not associated with R Core in any way, and do in fact empathize with your frustration with the process.)
I think it is worth pointing out that spelling errors in the DESCRIPTION file are of greater significance than other areas of a package as they can affect assignment of responsibility and permissions, as well as reflecting poorly on the CRAN summary web pages. I suspect that problems with DESCRIPTION files in the past lead to this requirement. I would encourage you to pause for a day or two before sending off messages like this in the future... a lesson I have learned the hard way myself. On July 16, 2021 9:08:27 AM PDT, "Kevin R. Coombes" <kevin.r.coom...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi, > > I have been updating a couple of R packages this morning. One of them >triggered a manual inspection for "possibly mis-spelled words in >DESCRIPTION" for my last name (Coombes) --- even though none of the >other 20 packages that I maintain has ever triggered that particular >NOTE. A second package also triggered a manual inspection for >mis-spelled words including "Proteomics". (These flags only arose on >the >debian CRAN machine, not the Windows CRAN machine, and not on my home >machines. And let's ignore how many spelling corrections I had to make >while typing this email) > >*My question, however, is: why should this NOTE ever trigger a manual >inspection?* That makes more work for the CRAN maintainers, who I am >sure have better things to do than evaluate spelling. Anything that >would actually stop the package from working (mis-spelling a keyword, >or >mis-spelling the name of package that is imported) is going to cause an >automatic ERROR and a rejection of the submission without making more >work for the CRAN maintainers. The other mis-spellings may reflect >poorly on the package author, but since they are NOTEs, it is easy >enough to get them fixed for the next round without making human >eyeballs look at them. > >Best, > Kevin > >______________________________________________ >R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel -- Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity. ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
