Re: [Rd] Saving Graphics File as .ps or .pdf (PR#10403)

From: Jari Oksanen <jari.oksanen_at_oulu.fi>
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:21:10 +0200

On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 10:51 +0100, Simone Giannerini wrote:
> [snip] (this is from pd = Peter Dalgaard)
> > Maybe, but given the way things have been working lately, it might be
> > better to emphasize
> >
> > (a) check the mailinglists
> > (b) try R-patched
> > (c) if in doubt, ask, rather than report as bug
> >
> > (Ideally, people would try the prerelease versions and problems like
> > this would be caught before the actual release, but it seems that they
> > prefer treating x.y.0 as a beta release...)
> >
>
> I am sorry but I do not agree with point (b) for the very simple fact
> that the average Windows user do not know how to compile the source
> code and might not even want to learn how to do it. The point is that
> since (if I am correct) the great majority of R users go Windows you
> would miss an important part of potential bug reports by requiring
> point (b) whereas (a) and (c) would suffice IMHO.
> Maybe if there were Win binaries of the prerelease version available
> some time before the release you would get much more feedback but I am
> just guessing.

First I must say that patched Windows binaries are available from CRAN with one extra click -- Linux and poor MacOS users must use 'svn co' to check out the patched version from the repository and compile from the sources. The attribute "poor" for MacOS users was there because this is a bigger step for Mac users than Linux users (who can easily get and install all tools they need and tend to have a different kind of mentality).

Then I must say that I do not like this policy either. I think that is fair to file a bug report against the latest release version in good faith without being chastised and condemned. I know (like pd says above) that some people really do treat x.y.0 as beta releases: a friend of mine over here even refuses to install R x.x.0 versions just for this reason (in fact, he's pd's mate, too, but perhaps pd can talk him over to try x.x.0 versions). Filing a bug report against latest x.x.1 shouldn't be too bad either.

I guess the problem here is that R bug reports are linked to the Rd mailing list, and reports on "alredy fixed" bugs really are irritating. In more loosely connected bug reporting systems you simply could mark a bug as a duplicate of #xxxx and mark it as resolved without generating awfully lot of mail. Then it would be humanly possible to adopt a more neutral way of answering to people who reported bugs in latest releases. Probably that won't happen in the current environment.

Cheers, Jari Oksanen

PS. Please Mr Moderator, don't treat me so mean (*): I've subscribed to this group although you regularly reject my mail as coming from a "non-member".

(*) an extract from a classic song "Mr R jumped the rabbit".

-- 
Jari Oksanen <jari.oksanen_at_oulu.fi>

______________________________________________
R-devel_at_r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Received on Wed 07 Nov 2007 - 14:59:55 GMT

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0, at Wed 07 Nov 2007 - 17:30:16 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel. Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.