using the identical version of each CRAN package. The bioconductor project uses similar policies.
While I agree that this can be an issue, I don't think it is fair to compare CRAN to BioC. Unless things have changed, the latter has a more rigorous barrier to entry which includes buy in of various ideals (e.g. interoperability w/ other BioC packages, making use of BioC constructs, the official release cycle). All of that requires extra management overhead (read: human effort) which considering that CRAN isn't exactly swimming in spare cycles seems unlikely to happen.
It seems like one could set up a curated CRAN-a-like quite easily, advertise the heck out of it and let the "market" decide. That is, IMO, the beauty of open source.
-J ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
