On Fri 01 Oct 2021 08:51:28 AM EDT, Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com> wrote:
Hi Douglas, On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 4:51 AM Torrance, Douglas <dtorrance@piedmont.edu> wrote:Would it be possible to avoid emitting this warning for R packages?Yes! We have a new facility for the purpose of granting summary exemptions to package groups. It is called a screen. [1]
Great!
As for your broader issue, I would actually prefer if version strings were totally unrestricted, but am in the minority. [2] I will revisit the details and then install a screen for you, unless we can get rid of the tag altogether.most R source packages can be identified easily because they generally start with "r-".We do not like to group based on installable names or source names. Those are a last resort because they enshrine namespaces that do not exist otherwise. On average, they also do not work well for language families where names vary (although it may for R). Can you think of another way to identify R packages?
Possibly having dh-r and/or r-base-dev in Build-Depends? I'm still relatively new to R packaging, though, so I'm Cc'ing the Debian R list for further input. Thanks! Doug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature