On Sun, Nov 1, 2020 at 10:39 PM Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/11/2020 2:57 p.m., Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > > > The closest to a canonical reference for a static vignette is the basic > blog > > post by Mark at > > > > > https://www.markvanderloo.eu/yaRb/2019/01/11/add-a-static-pdf-vignette-to-an-r-package/ > > > > which I follow in a number of packages. > > > > Back to the original point by Alexandre: No, I do _not_ think we can do > > without a double copy of the _pre-made_ pdf ("input") and the > _resulting_ pdf > > ("output"). > > > > That bugs me a little too but I take it as a given as static / pre-made > > vignettes are non-standard (given lack of any mention in WRE, and the > pretty > > obvious violation of the "spirit of the law" of vignette which is after > all > > made to run code, not to avoid it). Yet uses for static vignettes are > pretty > > valid and here we are with another clear as mud situation. > > > > In many cases such files aren't vignettes. > > By definition, packages should contain plain text source code for > vignettes. They can contain other PDF files in inst/doc, but if you > don't include the plain text source, those aren't vignettes. > > An exception would be a package that contains the source code but > doesn't want to require CRAN or other users to run it, because it's too > time-consuming, or needs obscure resources. The CRAN policy discusses > this. > > Duncan Murdoch > > It would be nice if the documents in inst/doc were linked to on the CRAN landing page of a package. I think that documents under inst/doc are a bit hard to find if package authors do not create (possibly many) links to them in Rd files or vignettes. Cheers, Mark [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
