For what it's worth, I didn't see your message as aggressive. But
that's email: it's hard to know the impressions people will get from it.
Regarding your point, I'd like to say (unaggressively!) that it's not
your problem if the CRAN folks choose differently than you would in how
they should spend their time. One thing I can infer from past silence
is that they don't like discussing such things here.
Duncan Murdoch
On 16/07/2021 1:37 p.m., Kevin R. Coombes wrote:
Hi Jeff,
I think you are inferring an attitude in my initial message that wasn't
actually present. I greatly appreciate the hard work that CRAN
maintainers put in on behalf of the community. And I really did (and do)
want to understand why some of their valuable volunteer time should be
occupied deciding if "possible mis-spellings" are (a) real and (b)
important enough to do something about.
I also admit to being possibly the world's worst typist. I often
mis-spell multiple words in a sentence, and I rely on numerous spell
checkers to point out the problems so I can fix them right away. (But
right now, I am unhappy that the spell-checker in my email client
insists that "mis-spell" and it variants doesn't have a hyphen in it.)
So, I agree that correct spelling is worth someone spending their time
on. But that someone (in my opinion) should be the package author and
maintainer, not the CRAN maintainers.
Part of the issue is that the mis-spellings are reported from R CMD
check as a NOTE, not a WARNING nor an ERROR. They don't affect the code
in any way (unlike the consequences of trying to import the "grpahics"
package -- boy, was that hard to type.). Further, most of the "possible
mis-spellings" that I have seen flagged in my own packages are false
positives. (As noted above; I use spell-checkers at several points along
the way so I can correct them before I submit.) Moreover, the results
from different spell-checkers (such as those on different CRAN machines)
are inconsistent. That increases the probability that any package is
going to get flagged with false positives and require manual intervention.
I don't know; maybe the CRAN maintainers like checking other people's
spelling manually. But having to do that on a regular basis would soon
make me run screaming from the room.
Best,
Kevin
On 7/16/2021 1:07 PM, Jeff Newmiller wrote:
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
______________________________________________
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
