Yes, as Lionel said that is why we have changed our terminology to superseded — we wanted to imply that a retired package was still a useful member of society, if not working full-time anymore, but most people seem to think that retired means that we took the package out behind the shed and put it out of its misery.
Haley On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:43 PM Lenth, Russell V <russell-le...@uiowa.edu> wrote: > > Hadley, > > As I suspected, and a good point. But please note that the term "retired" > causes angst, and it may be good to change that to "superceded" or something > else. > > As a side note, I'll mention that I myself am retired, and I'll claim that > that does not make me less dependable. But one difference in retirement is > that I now care less about public embarrassment, such as not knowing that all > along, I could have used base::apply instead of plyr::aaply. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hadley Wickham <h.wick...@gmail.com> > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 11:48 AM > To: Lenth, Russell V <russell-le...@uiowa.edu> > Cc: Jeff Newmiller <jdnew...@dcn.davis.ca.us>; r-package-devel@r-project.org > Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] [External] Re: What is a "retired"package? > > > But for the broader question, Jeff is saying that there really are 700 > > packages that are in potential trouble! > > I think that's rather an overstatement of the problem — there's nothing wrong > with plyr; it's just no longer under active development. > If anything, plyr is one of the safest packages to depend upon because you > can know it will never change :) > > Hadley > > -- > http://hadley.nz -- http://hadley.nz ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
