[Bioc-devel] Fwd: Rchemcpp problems reported in the Multiple platform build/check report for BioC 3.9

Dear BioC Core Team, I do not have time and resources to maintain "Rchemcpp" anymore. I also do not have any students/researchers at my institution who can overtake this work. I can accept that Rchemcpp is dropped from Bioconductor or -- if anybody else wants to maintain it -- to change the m

Re: [Bioc-devel] Annotation/Experiment Hub issue

We have pushed a fix for the AnnotationHub and ExperimentHub. It should be built tonight and propagate to the builders tomorrow. Unfortunately it was not implemented for today's experiment data package builds, but I expect many to clean up after the experiment data package builds again on Thu

Re: [Bioc-devel] BiocManager for BioC 3.9/R 3.6

Thanks Martin. For reproducibility we use containers, alongside a a RStudio Server Pro installation. This issue was occurring on my rolling release machines that I use for testing. One in particular (Siduction box) has been rolling since R 3.2, there are very rarely any issues. Best practise? Pro

Re: [Bioc-devel] builds of last 2 days

Hi Karim, Today's report has not arrived yet. You bumped canceR's version to 1.18.3 on May 6 (i.e. yesterday): biocbuild@malbec2:~/canceR$ git show 77cab2a7 DESCRIPTION commit 77cab2a7f7995fdb3de348893d45bbb3a5f15f7c (HEAD -> RELEASE_3_9, origin/RELEASE_3_9) Author: kmezhoud Date: Mo

[Bioc-devel] builds of last 2 days

Dear all, I re-cloned my package (canceR ), following this tutorial . And I commit some changes (05 May), and I bump version from 1.18.2 to 1.18.3. Actually I am seeing

[Bioc-devel] Annotation/Experiment Hub issue

We are in the process of fixing the issue with the AnnotationHub and ExperimentHub for the devel 3.10 builds. I hope to have a solution shortly. Currently maintainers whose packages are failing because of the hubs do not have to take any action at this time, this is on our end. We apprecia

Re: [Bioc-devel] permission denied

Thanks for the help! Now, the "offering public key" and "the sever accepts key" are the same, and the issue is solved. Ruizhu On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 12:59 PM Martin Morgan wrote: > You should check that the public ssh key used to access the Bioconductor > server is the same as (one of the) the

Re: [Bioc-devel] permission denied

You should check that the public ssh key used to access the Bioconductor server is the same as (one of the) the ssh key(s) registered in the app or in your github account, e.g., by looking carefully at the output of ssh -Tv g...@git.bioconductor.org for lines starting with debug1: Offering

Re: [Bioc-devel] BiocManager for BioC 3.9/R 3.6

Yes, remove BIocVersion (all copies) I guess you have a library path, as shown by .libPaths() in R, that is shared between the two versions. This is generally BAD PRACTICE. because it means packages built for R-3.6 will be used by both of your R-3.5 and R-3.6 installations, and vice versa -- th

Re: [Bioc-devel] BiocManager for BioC 3.9/R 3.6

I had the same issue today, here's the note I made on our work Teams channel: Not too sure where to deposit this little piece of information. Just a little 'hiccup' in the latest transition of R versions (3.5 -> 3.6) and Bioconductor. The newest stable version of Bioconductor (3.9) depends on R 3.

[Bioc-devel] BiocManager for BioC 3.9/R 3.6

Hi, I just installed R 3.6, but everything I try to get a BiocManager Version, which works with R 3.6 were so far not successful. I installed BiocManager from CRAN � > install.packages("BiocManager") � and from GitHub � > devtools::install_github("Bioconductor/BiocManager") � but both times

Re: [Bioc-devel] permission denied

Now, I could login to the Bioconductor git credentials, and SSH key does exist there. However, the issue about permission denied is still as described in my first email. Does the upper case letters in the email address matter? Thanks for your help! Ruizhu On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:39 PM Shepherd,