Dear Terry
Option 2 looks the best to me. They have a relatively simple change to
make and there are only four of them.
Michael
On 16/02/2021 14:39, Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel wrote:
I am testing out the next release of survival, which involves running R CMD
check on 868
CRAN packages that import, depend or suggest it.
The survival package has a lot of data sets, most of which are non-trivial real
examples
(something I'm proud of). To save space I've bundled many of them, .e.g.,
data/cancer.rda
has 19 different dataframes.
This caused failures in 4 packages, each because they have a line such as
"data(lung)" or
data(breast, package= "survival"); and the data() command looks for a file name.
This is a question about which option is considered the best (perhaps more of a
poll),
between two choices
1. unbundle them again (it does save 1/3 of the space, and I do get complaints
from R CMD
build about size)
2. send notes to the 4 maintainers. The help files for the data sets have the
usage
documented as "lung" or "breast", and not data(lung), so I am technically
legal to claim
they have a mistake.
A third option to make the data sets a separate package is not on the table. I
use them
heavily in my help files and test suite, and since survival is a recommended
package I
can't add library(x) statements for !(x %in% recommended). I am guessing
that this
would also break many dependent packages.
Terry T.
--
Michael
http://www.dewey.myzen.co.uk/home.html
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
