On 04/07/2015 12:26 AM, Rolf Turner wrote: > On 04/07/15 06:27, Yihui Xie wrote: >> Sigh, how natural it is to say "This package ...", but you probably >> don't know a package can be easily rejected by CRAN simply because of >> this phrase "This package" (it has been clearly stated in the R-exts >> manual). > > Urrrkkkk! I *did* "know" that, but had forgotten. Apologies for my > wrong-headed suggestion. Thanks for pointing out my error. > >> I don't think the grammar is the problem here. When in doubt, I always >> check what MASS does: >> http://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/MASS/index.html Turns out its >> description is not a complete sentence, either. >> >> Sounds like R has become a language for statistical computing and >> graphics, plus English grammar since 3.0.x. > > The CRAN guidelines should be rewritten so that they say what they > *mean*. If a complete sentence is not actually required --- and it > seems abundantly clear that it is not --- then guidelines should not say > so. Rather they should say, clearly and comprehensibly, what actually > *is* required.
There's often a difference between a requirement and the test for it. If you meet the requirement, you should pass the test, but you can often pass the test without meeting the requirement, and then you may find that the test is improved in a later version. (Requirements may also be changed, of course.) Duncan Murdoch ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
