Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Simplify orderly initialisation #118

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 20, 2023
Merged

Simplify orderly initialisation #118

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 20, 2023

Conversation

richfitz
Copy link
Member

@richfitz richfitz commented Nov 20, 2023

As discussed in mrc-4725, make orderly_init more consistent with other functions:

  • use root as the argument, not path. This had been a deliberate decision but clearly not a useful one
  • allow initialisation of the current directory by default (i.e., use a default arg of "."). This is something frowned upon by CRAN, but I can see the argument in favour

Possibly we should prevent nested repository creation (i.e., check on creation that no parent directory has .outpack) but git does not do that

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (86fbbb6) 100.00% compared to head (a2c6e00) 100.00%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #118   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           40        40           
  Lines         3512      3513    +1     
=========================================
+ Hits          3512      3513    +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@richfitz richfitz marked this pull request as ready for review November 20, 2023 10:05
@richfitz richfitz requested a review from plietar November 20, 2023 10:05
@plietar
Copy link
Member

plietar commented Nov 20, 2023

This is something frowned upon by CRAN

I'm curious what you mean by that

@richfitz
Copy link
Member Author

https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html these are the CRAN policies. Typically the first time a package is submitted (but sometimes other times) they do a manual inspection which tends to be a mixture of idiosyncratic and pedantic. The rule

  • Packages should not write in the user’s home filespace (including clipboards), nor anywhere else on the file system apart from the R session’s temporary directory (or during installation in the location pointed to by TMPDIR: and such usage should be cleaned up). Installing into the system’s R installation (e.g., scripts to its bin directory) is not allowed.

is the one that tends to intersect with this, and in the past I and others have had demands to remove default paths that would write to useful locations, such as the working directory. It's hard to overstate how different CRAN is to crates.io/pypi etc, and how little transparency there is over decisions that are made.

@richfitz richfitz merged commit 3738706 into main Nov 20, 2023
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants