Re: [Rd] Re: [R] A long digression on packages

From: Dirk Eddelbuettel <>
Date: Sun 05 Jun 2005 - 16:08:59 GMT

On 5 June 2005 at 17:31, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
| Dirk Eddelbuettel <> writes:
| > Jim raises good points, as do the replies. On the topic of '500+ and
| > growing', let me add my pet peeve: It is mighty impossible to know /what/
| > changed /when/ in CRANland.
| >
| > Being Debian maintainer for a fair number of packages, I owe users of those
| > packages timely updates. But the best I can do is to look at the
| > timestamp-sorted source directory
| > That is tedious, as well as error-prone. Moreover, as an R user, I'd like to
| > know what is being added and, and what is being changed. There is no way to
| > know right now.
| >
| > I would not be hard to write a little monitoring script that looks at the
| > directory (and keeps tab in a Rdata structure, or SQLite db, or ...) and
| > spits out either emails, or maybe rss-feed updates, of either or both of 'new
| > packages' or 'new versions'. If additionally we would enforce (err let's
| > start with encourage) a standardised changelog (say $SRC/inst/CHANGES or
| > $SRC/inst/ChangeLog) then that could get parsed too. I had meant to play
| > with some code for this for a while now but it just hasn't happened.
| > Whining on a list is easier than writing code, unfortunately...
| >
| > Comments?
| You might want to have a closer look at the way recommended packages
| are handled by an R distribution build, using rsync, links,
| timestamps, and makefile rules.

And recode/adapt that for the packages I am interested in? Works, but doesn't scale. But maybe I am misunderstanding you here.


Statistics: The (futile) attempt to offer certainty about uncertainty.
         -- Roger Koenker, 'Dictionary of Received Ideas of Statistics'

______________________________________________ mailing list
Received on Mon Jun 06 02:12:46 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon 24 Oct 2005 - 22:26:57 GMT