I understand these reasons, and they certainly make sense when a
package has a big/complicated src/ directory. Perhaps one day more
developers will move the building and checking to cloud services (e.g.
I have been using Travis CI), so nobody cares about the
building/checking time spent on local ma
> Duncan Murdoch
> on Sun, 27 Oct 2013 08:56:31 -0400 writes:
> On 13-10-26 9:49 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>> On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Yihui Xie wrote:
>>
>>> This has been asked s many times that I think it may
>>> be a good idea for R CMD check to just s
On 13-10-26 9:49 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Yihui Xie wrote:
This has been asked s many times that I think it may be a good
idea for R CMD check to just stop when the user passes a directory
instead of a tar ball to it, or automatically run R CMD build before
mov
On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Yihui Xie wrote:
> This has been asked s many times that I think it may be a good
> idea for R CMD check to just stop when the user passes a directory
> instead of a tar ball to it, or automatically run R CMD build before
> moving on. In my opinion, sometimes an F
On 25/10/2013 11:37 AM, Sanford Weisberg wrote:
Using SUSE Linux, Windows 32 bit and Windows 64 bit R 3.0.2 , I am unable
to use R CMD check successfully. Here is the Windows 64 bit report:
Both checking and installing code are really designed to work on
tarballs, as John said. Some parts of
This has been asked s many times that I think it may be a good
idea for R CMD check to just stop when the user passes a directory
instead of a tar ball to it, or automatically run R CMD build before
moving on. In my opinion, sometimes an FAQ and a bug are not entirely
different.
Regards,
Yihui
