Jeff Ryan wrote:
One critical aspect to this is the fact that RcppTemplate seems to have been where the Rcpp work moved to _before_ abandoning the Rcpp project.
The Rcpp package was not abandoned, it was renamed to RcppTemplate because I thought it would be more useful for the R community to have a complete solution to the package development problem, not just a stand-alone library (Rcpp). The Rcpp package (not to be confused with the Rcpp library!) forked from RcppTemplate_5.3, not Rcpp_x_x, and RcppTemplate was in the CRAN archives the whole time (not abandoned).
This explains Stavros' confusion about the naming, and it also highlights the questions raised by Henrik. Perhaps there is a need for a package name registrar.
Plus, everyone benefits from competition. And we have a good one here.
I do not think having to compete with your own work is a "good one." I may have to rename RcppTemplate and the Rcpp library again to something entirely different. Dominick ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
