I would recommend option 2. I have done that when changes to xtable broke some
packages. xtable has a number of dependencies but not on the scale of survival.
Just 4 packages out of 868 seems minimal to me.
David Scott
On 17/02/2021 3:39 am, Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel wrote:
I am tes
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 pac
Duncan and others: I was not being careful with my description. This
concerned tests of
version 3.2-8, not yet on CRAN, in which I was trying some size-limiting
measures. My
apologies for not making this clear.
- I feel mild pressure to make the survival package smaller, per CRAN
guide
On 24/10/2020 2:00 p.m., Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 24 October 2020 at 05:28, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
| they are and ignore the warnings about package size. I think that's a
| negotiation you should have with R Core.
s/R Core/CRAN/ ?
Yes, for that part. The other suggestions need R Core agr
On 24 October 2020 at 05:28, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
| they are and ignore the warnings about package size. I think that's a
| negotiation you should have with R Core.
s/R Core/CRAN/ ?
Dirk
--
https://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
__
On 23/10/2020 9:25 p.m., Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel wrote:
I found an issue with the data() command this evening when working on the
survival package.
1. I have a lot of data sets in the package, almost all used in at least one
vignette,
help file, or test. As a space saving measur
