On 21/07/2016 6:50 PM, Jim Lemon wrote:
Hi all,
I had a quick look through the tools package, but was unable to find
the function that checks the DESCRIPTION file.
src/library/tools/R/QC.R near line 6600.
From the look of the
functions I did examine, it looks like there will be a call somewh
Hi all,
I had a quick look through the tools package, but was unable to find
the function that checks the DESCRIPTION file. From the look of the
functions I did examine, it looks like there will be a call somewhere
to a spell checker for DESCRIPTION. As I notice a lot of spelling
mistakes in the he
On 22.07.2016 00:48, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 22/07/16 10:37, Uwe Ligges wrote:
On 22.07.2016 00:34, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 21/07/2016 5:48 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
I just had a revision of a package built by win-builder, as a way of
exposing it to a rigorous check before uploading it to CRAN.
On 22/07/16 10:37, Uwe Ligges wrote:
On 22.07.2016 00:34, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 21/07/2016 5:48 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
I just had a revision of a package built by win-builder, as a way of
exposing it to a rigorous check before uploading it to CRAN.
The 00check.log contained the note:
> P
On 22/07/16 10:34, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 21/07/2016 5:48 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
I just had a revision of a package built by win-builder, as a way of
exposing it to a rigorous check before uploading it to CRAN.
The 00check.log contained the note:
> Possibly mis-spelled words in DESCRIPTION
On 22.07.2016 00:34, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 21/07/2016 5:48 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
I just had a revision of a package built by win-builder, as a way of
exposing it to a rigorous check before uploading it to CRAN.
The 00check.log contained the note:
> Possibly mis-spelled words in DESCRIPTI
On 21/07/2016 5:48 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
I just had a revision of a package built by win-builder, as a way of
exposing it to a rigorous check before uploading it to CRAN.
The 00check.log contained the note:
> Possibly mis-spelled words in DESCRIPTION:
> Delaunay (4:8, 10:29)
> Voronoi
On 22/07/16 10:00, Ben Bolker wrote:
Previous conversation on r-devel:
https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2014-December/070237.html
Martin Mächler suggests that a patch to R-devel would be welcome:
I agree that some customization possibility would be great here.
Maybe it'll be sufficient
Previous conversation on r-devel:
https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2014-December/070237.html
Martin Mächler suggests that a patch to R-devel would be welcome:
> I agree that some customization possibility would be great here.
> Maybe it'll be sufficient to allow a short list of about a do
