On 2025-03-31 12:41 p.m., Josiah Parry wrote:> Duncan, the changes to symbols checking was introduced March 22nd see
> https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18789
> <https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18789> and
>
https://developer.r-project.org/blosxom.cgi/R-devel/NEWS/2025/03/22#n2025-03-22
<https://developer.r-project.org/blosxom.cgi/R-devel/NEWS/2025/03/22#n2025-03-22>.
But that is unrelated.
Sorry, I missed that.
>
> To Tim's comment?the check is a simple grep of the installation?log for
> "Downloading crates." This could be easily circumvented on CRAN
and
> locally by suppressing stdout/err. But that would be adversarial and I
> would like to adhere to the intent of the check.
I think Tim was suggesting that you modify your Github action to ignore
this particular warning. The warning would still appear, but it
wouldn't cause a check failure.
Duncan Murdoch
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 9:23?AM Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at
gmail.com
> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On 2025-03-31 11:50 a.m., Josiah Parry wrote:
> > Following up with this as I address the new R-devel
"Compiled code
> > should not call entry points which might terminate R"
WARNING and
> this
> > issue has reared its head again.
> >
> > Would a path forward be an environment variable similar
> > to?_R_CHECK_CRAN_INCOMING_ to skip this check primarily for
GitHub
> > Actions and CI?
>
> The "Compiled code should not call entry points which might
> terminate R"
> isn't a new warning.? I think the last change to it was made in
2022.
>
> Maybe your code, or code in one of the libraries you use, has changed?
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Or, alternatively, if this could be a NOTE when the `--as-cran`
flag
> > isn't set but a WARNING when it is?
> >
> > Re-vendoring dependencies each time they are changed during the
> > development lifecycle is quite a bit. However, vendoring once
> prior to
> > publishing makes good sense.
> >
> > Is there a balance we can strike here to lower development
> friction but
> > also ensure the robust package installation requirements when
> expected?
> >
> > Using
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 2, 2025 at 11:42?AM Duncan Murdoch
> <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com <mailto:murdoch.duncan at
gmail.com>
> > <mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com
> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >
> >? ? ?On 2025-03-02 1:09 p.m., Ben Bolker wrote:
> >? ? ? >? ? I, like Duncan, am just following along here. I
think there
> >? ? ?might be
> >? ? ? > two distinct questions which it would be useful to keep
> distinct:
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >? ? * how to silence the rust-check if desired?
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >? ? ?rather than debating whether the rust-check should
be
> always-on,
> >? ? ? > on-for-CRAN-only, etc., would it provide for useful
> flexibility
> >? ? ?to add
> >? ? ? > an environment variable that enables/disables this
> >? ? ?functionality?? There
> >? ? ? > are already 168 of these environment variables, how
much would
> >? ? ?one more
> >? ? ? > cost?
> >
> >? ? ?I may have misunderstood Josiah.? I thought his message said
> that it is
> >? ? ?already easy to silence the check, by stopping the code from
> issuing
> >? ? ?the
> >? ? ?message the check is looking for.
> >
> >? ? ?Presumably the package shouldn't do that, but if
there's an
> environment
> >? ? ?variable that can be set to do it, then the repository or
> user can
> >? ? ?choose to do it, so there's no need for R to add another
> environment
> >? ? ?variable.
> >
> >? ? ?BTW, as far as I can see current R-devel doesn't issue an
> error, it
> >? ? ?just
> >? ? ?issues warnings about two issues:
> >
> >? ? ? ? - the package is downloading crates
> >? ? ? ? - the rustc compiler doesn't report a version number
> >
> >? ? ?Duncan Murdoch
> >
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >? ? ?I'm not sure how adding an environment variable
to
> allow easier
> >? ? ? > user/alternate-repository control of the check is
"against the
> >? ? ?spirit of
> >? ? ? > the check" ...
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >? ? ?All the existing check-regulating env variables ...
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? > cd src/library/tools/R
> >? ? ? > grep 'Sys.getenv("_R_CHECK' * | sed -e
> 's/^.*Sys.getenv(//' | sed -e
> >? ? ? > 's/[,)].*//' | sort | uniq | wc
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >? ? ?* should CRAN allow Rust crates to be downloaded?
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >? ? ?This is a much more fundamental policy decision,
which
> I have no
> >? ? ? > opinion about.
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >? ? ?cheers
> >? ? ? >? ? ? Ben Bolker
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? >
> >? ? ? > On 2025-03-02 12:21 p.m., Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> >? ? ? >> On 2025-03-02 11:03 a.m., Josiah Parry wrote:
> >? ? ? >>> Well this has surely veered off course!
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>> As the one who filed the BugZilla report,
I'd like to
> redirect the
> >? ? ? >>> conversation and provide further context.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>> The question should?be /"how do we get a
dialogue
> started on this
> >? ? ? >>> bugzilla issue before the next minor /
> >? ? ? >>> /release of R?"/
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >> Isn't this exactly that dialogue?
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>> The current check for Rust-based R
package's downloading
> external
> >? ? ? >>> dependencies works by looking at
> >? ? ? >>> the output logs for the presence of?
"Downloading
> crates." This
> >? ? ?can is
> >? ? ? >>> an entirely fine requirement for
> >? ? ? >>> CRAN?however, due to the fact that it is an
error, packages
> >? ? ? >>> distributed through other repositories
> >? ? ? >>> fail the R-CMD check.
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >> I think you misunderstood me.? CRAN shares the view
I
> gave that you
> >? ? ? >> should be able to run old code to reproduce old
results, but
> >? ? ?they aren't
> >? ? ? >> the only ones.? That's always been a goal of R.
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >>> Folks who use R-universe or PPM or some
mysterious third
> thing
> >? ? ?may not
> >? ? ? >>> share the same philosophy as
> >? ? ? >>> CRAN and prefer the convenience of fetching the
> dependencies at
> >? ? ? >>> compile time and not vendoring them.
> >? ? ? >>> An alternative would be for the check to be
optionally
> skipped or
> >? ? ? >>> become a NOTE when the CRAN
> >? ? ? >>> flag is not set and an ERROR otherwise.
Skipping this CRAN
> >? ? ?check is as
> >? ? ? >>> easy as adding `--quiet`
> >? ? ? >>> or setting an environment variable?but that is
against the
> >? ? ?spirit of
> >? ? ? >>> the check.
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >> If it is that easy to skip the check, then I really
don't see
> >? ? ?the issue.
> >? ? ? >>? ??Just ask the repository where you want to put
your
> package to
> >? ? ?put that
> >? ? ? >> option or environment variable in place, and
there's no
> longer a
> >? ? ?problem.
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >> Duncan Murdoch
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >>> Ideally, the check can remain, but scoped
appropriately.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2025 at 6:49?AM Duncan Murdoch
> >? ? ? >>> <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com
> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at
gmail.com
> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>>
> >? ? ?<mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com
> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at
gmail.com
> <mailto:murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>>>>
> >? ? ?wrote:
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? You seem to be taking a confontational
tone, which
> isn't
> >? ? ?likely to
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? encourage a reasonable dialogue.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? I've looked for other messages on
this, and didn't
> see any
> >? ? ?besides
> >? ? ? >>> this
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? one explaining why including check_rust()
in the
> checks is
> >? ? ?a problem.
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? The problem you talk about here is that it
encourages
> >? ? ?vendoring,
> >? ? ? >>> which
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? makes it harder for package authors to
count downloads.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? To be honest, that doesn't seem like a
very serious
> >? ? ?problem.? I
> >? ? ? >>> assume
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? the packages ("crates") we are
talking about are open
> >? ? ?source, so
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? this is
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? entirely in the spirit of how they are
allowed to be
> >? ? ?distributed.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? If they aren't open source, then users
of those
> packages
> >? ? ?should be
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? warned about that, and a check failure is
a good
> way to do
> >? ? ?that.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? So you need to explain why it is important
to be
> able to
> >? ? ?download and
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? install software and not be warned about
it.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? I am not in R Core or CRAN, but I can
suggest why it is
> >? ? ?better to
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? include source in the package:? it makes
the use of
> that
> >? ? ?package more
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? reliable in the future.? It's not
uncommon to run an R
> >? ? ?computation
> >? ? ? >>> that
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? was written a few years ago.? Sometimes
libraries or R
> >? ? ?have changed,
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? and
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? a user will need to go back to a previous
version to
> >? ? ?reproduce the
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? calculation.? Being able to able to
rebuild a
> system as it
> >? ? ?would have
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? been back then is important.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? Is that possible if the package needs to
make a
> download?? The
> >? ? ? >>> download
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? site that worked a few years ago may no
longer
> exist.? If
> >? ? ?the site
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? exists, the code versions there may be
different.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? Those are some of the issues that Simon
was
> alluding to.
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? Duncan Murdoch
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? On 2025-03-02 5:45 a.m., Mossa Merhi
Reimert via
> R-devel
> >? ? ?wrote:
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Dear Simon Urbanek,
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > There has been very little
engagement with the
> issue I
> >? ? ?referred
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? to. If it was decided that this ?check?
ought to be
> part
> >? ? ?of the
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? default checks for R,
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > then that could have been written to
us. Either
> on the
> >? ? ? >>> bugs.r-project.org
<http://bugs.r-project.org>
> <http://bugs.r-project.org <http://bugs.r-project.org>>
> >? ? ?<http://bugs.r-project.org
<http://bugs.r-project.org>
> <http://bugs.r-project.org <http://bugs.r-project.org>>>
or the proposed
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? patch. Before we talk about anything else,
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > it does seem very strange that we
cannot get a
> reasonable
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? dialogue going.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > I would like to say that the R/Rust
community
> has grown
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? substantially. From my end, there are 3
bindings
> project,
> >? ? ?extendr,
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? savvy, and roxido.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Then, there are now many rust-based
packages on
> CRAN,
> >? ? ?see this
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? most recent compiled list
> > https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs
> <https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs
> <https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
<https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs
> <https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs
> <https://github.com/nanxstats/r-rust-pkgs>>>.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > There is also proof-of-concept
> >? ? ? >>> https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust
> <https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust
> <https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? <https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust
> <https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust
> <https://github.com/r-rust/hellorust>>> that integrates
`cargo`,
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? rust?s official build system, with R?s
package
> build system,
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > and
https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc
> <https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc
> <https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? <https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc
> <https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc
> <https://github.com/extendr/hellorustc>>>, which showcases
how Rust
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? compiler could be directly linked with R?s
package
> system.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >? ?Let me say, that the current R CMD
check is
> not meant
> >? ? ?to be
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? ?helpful?. When a package is built,
`cargo` tells
> the user
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? ?Downloading crates?.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Thus, this information is already
conveyed to
> the user.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Personally, I do wish we could
debate this
> requirement
> >? ? ?further. I
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? do not believe that having R-packages on
CRAN
> vendor rust
> >? ? ? >>> dependencies
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > as a good policy. Download
statistics is a success
> >? ? ?metric of a
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? given r-package and rust packages. By
insisting on
> >? ? ?vendoring, and
> >? ? ? >>> thus
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > side-stepping `cargo` / crates.io
> <http://crates.io> <http://crates.io
<http://crates.io>>
> >? ? ?<http://crates.io <http://crates.io>
<http://crates.io
> <http://crates.io>>>, we are
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? robbing upstream authors of their
download-numbers.
> I do
> >? ? ?not think
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? such policy is honourable.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > While C/C++ do not have official
package
> repositories,
> >? ? ?it could
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? be thought of, as fair game, to have CRAN
act as a
> pseudo
> >? ? ?package
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? manager for C/C++ libraries.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > I?m not going to argue for or
against this part.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > There are many objections from the
CRAN side to
> all things
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? related to Rust. I don?t want to open
multiple
> topics in
> >? ? ?the same
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? thread.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > But there is plenty to bring up. And
I had hoped we
> >? ? ?could talk
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? this little issue through, before
embarking on a larger
> >? ? ?discussion.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > I do not appreciate the ?random
demands? comment, as
> >? ? ?this is not
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? a demand, nor is it random.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > I have inquired my end of the
community for
> suggestions
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > to compile a larger proposal, but
then I was afraid
> >? ? ?that this
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? would be perceived as a big, bulky demand.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Rust is not C/C++/Java, and the
support for Rust
> cannot
> >? ? ?look like
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? the support for these languages.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > From: Simon Urbanek
<simon.urbanek at R-project.org>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Date: Sunday, 2 March 2025 at 00.39
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > To: Mossa Merhi Reimert <mossa at
sund.ku.dk
> <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk>
> >? ? ?<mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk <mailto:mossa at
sund.ku.dk>>
> >? ? ? >>> <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk <mailto:mossa
at sund.ku.dk>
> <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk <mailto:mossa at
sund.ku.dk>>>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Cc: r-devel at r-project.org
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org>
> >? ? ?<mailto:r-devel at r-project.org <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org>>
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org>
> >? ? ?<mailto:r-devel at r-project.org <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org>>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? <r-devel at r-project.org
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org> <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org>>
> >? ? ?<mailto:r-devel at r-project.org <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org>
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org>>>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Subject: Re: [Rd] R CMD check and
CRAN's Rust policy
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > [Du f?r ikke ofte mails fra
> simon.urbanek at r-project.org <mailto:simon.urbanek at
r-project.org>
> >? ? ?<mailto:simon.urbanek at r-project.org
> <mailto:simon.urbanek at r-project.org>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? <mailto:simon.urbanek at r-project.org
> <mailto:simon.urbanek at r-project.org>
> >? ? ?<mailto:simon.urbanek at r-project.org
> <mailto:simon.urbanek at r-project.org>>>. F? mere at vide
om, hvorfor
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? dette er vigtigt, p?
> > https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification
> <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
> >? ? ?<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification
> <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification
> <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
> >? ? ?<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification
> <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>>> ]
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Mossa,
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > the issue you cite is lacking any
pertinent
> information
> >? ? ?and it's
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? not even clear why it should be an issue.
The check is
> >? ? ?perfectly
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? justified, it just reports whether a
package using rust
> >? ? ?declares
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? this correctly and where it downloads 3rd
party
> content -
> >? ? ?something
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? that is important to R users in general
and not
> related to
> >? ? ?CRAN. I
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? don't see how any of this is
"prohibitive" it just
> calls
> >? ? ?out what
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? the package is already doing.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > As discussed before, my hope was
that the "R"ust
> >? ? ?community will
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? mature enough to work on proper support.
It is not
> clear
> >? ? ?that it
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? happened yet, but once it does it would
make sense
> to talk
> >? ? ?about
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? support just as we have for C, C++ and
Java, so
> certainly that
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? should be the right discussion. However,
it will
> have to
> >? ? ?start with
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? some thinking and a proposal on how the
associated
> issues
> >? ? ?(compiler
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? support, versioning, dependency sources
etc.) are to be
> >? ? ?addressed,
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? as opposed to making random demands. All
this has
> nothing
> >? ? ?to do with
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? CRAN so the issue you mention seems
irrelevant to the
> >? ? ?progress. Also
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? I'd like to know what are the
"challenges embedded in R
> >? ? ?itself".
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Cheers,
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > Simon
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> On Mar 2, 2025, at 8:45 AM,
Mossa Merhi Reimert via
> >? ? ?R-devel
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? <r-devel at r-project.org
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org> <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org>>
> >? ? ?<mailto:r-devel at r-project.org <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org>
> <mailto:r-devel at r-project.org <mailto:r-devel at
r-project.org>>>> wrote:
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Hello everyone!
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> I'm Mossa, I'm one of
the maintainers of
> extendr, an
> >? ? ?automated
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? generation of bindings project for
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Rust code, for use in
R-packages.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> I'm writing to you, as R
4.4.3 was just
> released, and
> >? ? ?there have
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? not been
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> follow-up on an issue important
to us. Link to the
> >? ? ?issue as
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? discussed on r-devel
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html>
> >
> ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html
>
<https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html>>
> >? ? ? >>>
> >
> ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html>
> >
> ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html
>
<https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2024-October/083666.html>>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> A community member has provided
a suggestion to a
> >? ? ?patch here
> >? ? ? >>> https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182
> <https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182
> <https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
<https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182
> <https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182>
> >? ? ?<https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182
> <https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/182>>>, and we have
also
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? attempted to bring it up on
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Bugzilla:
> > https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806
> <https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806>
> >? ? ?<https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806
> <https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
<https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806
> <https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806>
> >? ? ?<https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806
> <https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18806>>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> TLDR: Default `R CMD check` uses
additional
> >? ? ?CRAN-specific checks
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? for Rust,
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> instead of keeping this behind
the --as-cran flag.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> I would like to say, that there
is a growing
> interest
> >? ? ?in Rust
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? within the R community.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> And generally, Rust becoming a
widely adopted
> language
> >? ? ?within
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? the Python community (including the
scientific part
> of that
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? community). It is time to deal with the
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> pain points with using Rust in
R.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Therefore, I would kindly ask
that we have a
> dialogue
> >? ? ?on how to
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? remedy the issue above first, and how we
may deal with
> >? ? ?other issues
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? going forward. There are both challenges
embedded in R
> >? ? ?itself, and
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? the current CRAN policy for Rust is
prohibitive.
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Mossa Merhi Reimert
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Postdoctoral Researcher
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> K?benhavns Universitet
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Department of Veterinary and
Animal Sciences
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Animal Welfare and Disease
Control
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Gr?nneg?rdsvej 8
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> 1870 Frederiksberg C
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> Denmark
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> +45 35324135
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> mossa at sund.ku.dk
<mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk>
> <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk
<mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk>
> >? ? ?<mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk
> <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk>>><mailto:mossa at
sund.ku.dk
> <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk>
> >? ? ?<mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk <mailto:mossa at
sund.ku.dk>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ??? <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk
<mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk>
> <mailto:mossa at sund.ku.dk <mailto:mossa at
sund.ku.dk>>>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>? ? ? ? [[alternative HTML
version deleted]]
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
______________________________________________
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >> R-devel at r-project.org
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org> <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org>>
> >? ? ?<mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>>>
> >? ? ?mailing list
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >>
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >? ? ? ?[[alternative HTML version
deleted]]
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
______________________________________________
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? > R-devel at r-project.org
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org> <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org>>
> >? ? ?<mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>>>
> >? ? ?mailing list
> >? ? ? >>>? ???? >
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>>
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
______________________________________________
> >? ? ? >>> R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>>
> >? ? ?<mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>>>
> >? ? ?mailing list
> >? ? ? >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>
> >? ? ? >>>? ???
<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>>
> >? ? ? >>>
> >? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? >> ______________________________________________
> >? ? ? >> R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>>
> mailing list
> >? ? ? >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>
> >? ? ? >
> >
> >? ? ?______________________________________________
> > R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org>
> <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at
r-project.org>>
> mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> >? ? ?<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>>
> >
>