Re: [R] Rating R Helpers

From: Patrick Connolly <>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 18:49:29 +1300

On Tue, 04-Dec-2007 at 05:32PM -0800, Ben Bolker wrote:

|> S Ellison wrote:
|> >
|> > Package review is a nice idea. But you raise a worrying point.
|> > Are any of the 'downright dangerous' packages on CRAN?
|> > If so, er... why?
|> >
|> >
|> >>>> <> 12/01/07 7:21 AM >>>
|> >>I think the need for this is rather urgent, in fact. Most packages are
|> >>very good, but I regret to say some are pretty inefficient and others
|> >>downright dangerous.
|> >
|> >
|> Presumably because the primary requirement for packages being
|> accepted on CRAN is that they pass "R CMD check". This is a fine
|> minimum standard -- it means that packages will definitely install --

That's not quite true. Package BRugs will go halfway through the installation before a Linux user is given the information that it will not work with Linux. The automated way the packages are listed doesn't manage to collect that bit of information (and that's nothing anyone should be ashamed of).

Somewhere for adding information such as that could help avoid the need for many people finding that out for themselves.


   ___    Patrick Connolly   
 {~._.~}          		 Great minds discuss ideas    
 _( Y )_  	  	        Middle minds discuss events 
(:_~*~_:) 	       		 Small minds discuss people  
 (_)-(_)  	                           ..... Anon

______________________________________________ mailing list
PLEASE do read the posting guide
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Received on Wed 05 Dec 2007 - 05:56:21 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 05 Dec 2007 - 08:30:17 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.