search for: check_package_descript

...ates: "The `Package', `Version', `License', `Description', `Title', `Author', and `Maintainer' fields are mandatory..." So should I really add all these (superfluous) fields, to avoid future rejection? (A comment inside .find.package() refers to tools:::check_package_description, but I could not find such a function. Is there a plan for a universal package validator, and if so, what are its requirements?) Bigger picture, will g.data be rendered obsolete by lazy loading? -- -- David Brahm (brahm@alum.mit.edu)

..., ‘print.codocData’, ‘print.subdir_tests’, ‘print.undoc’, ‘print.check_Rd_files_in_Rd_db’, ‘print.check_Rd_xrefs’, ‘print.check_T_and_F’, ‘print.check_code_usage_in_package’, ‘print.check_dotInternal’, ‘print.check_make_vars’, ‘print.check_package_code_syntax’, ‘print.check_package_depends’, ‘print.check_package_description’, ‘print.check_package_description_encoding’, ‘print.check_package_license’, ‘print.check_package_datasets’, ‘print.check_packages_used’ sont déclarées dans NAMESPACE mais sont introuvables Execution halted make[3]: *** [all] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/data/prog/R-2.9.1/src/library/to...