On 11/1/24 17:40, Ivan Krylov wrote:
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:56:01 +0100
Tomas Kalibera wrote:
isn't there a finer-grained way to suppress reports just
of this particular issue, ideally at finer granularity than a
function?
The line saying "function:do_dotCode" in the suppression file will
su
Dear Dirk,
Thank you so much for your tips.
I'll implement them and try a new submission.
Best regards,
Olivoto
Em dom., 3 de nov. de 2024 às 14:08, Dirk Eddelbuettel
escreveu:
>
> Tiago,
>
> Looking at https://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/bdr/noSuggests/pliman.out
> we see it errors after trying '*
Rolf,
The versioning method they’re using is referred to as CalVer
https://calver.org/ (not as catchy as SemVer) and it is actually quite
useful! With one look at the version you can get a good sense of it’s
general release date.
Posit, for example, moved their professional products to use this
v
On 2024-11-04 4:33 p.m., Toby Hocking wrote:
Dear CRAN
I see a new NOTE, and I wonder if you would consider undoing this new
addition to checks? This would cause all of my packages to fail auto
checks, which would cause a lot of extra false positives, and lots of
extra work for both me and the CR
Dear CRAN
I see a new NOTE, and I wonder if you would consider undoing this new
addition to checks? This would cause all of my packages to fail auto
checks, which would cause a lot of extra false positives, and lots of
extra work for both me and the CRAN team who works on approving
submissions whic
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:33:40 -0500
Toby Hocking wrote:
> Version jumps in minor (submitted: 2024.11.2, existing: 2024.1.24)
It looks to me that you are setting your version numbers in an
unorthodox manner, which could/will confuse the living Drambuie out of
people.
I conjecture that you are
