On 2025-03-31 1:04 p.m., Duncan Murdoch wrote:> 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
At a very quick look, I don't see an easy way to do that (but I am
admittedly really bad at doing stuff with Github actions). Maybe longer
term, but it feels like the best way to do this would be to request a
feature in `rcmdcheck` that allowed the user to request ignoring
specific warnings (e.g. specified by regexp?), then expose that feature
in the r-check-package action (or whatever it's called ...)
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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>>
>> ???? >
>>
>
--
Dr. Benjamin Bolker
Professor, Mathematics & Statistics and Biology, McMaster University
Director, School of Computational Science and Engineering
> E-mail is sent at my convenience; I don't expect replies outside of
working hours.