-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
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
CRAN release #165
Comments
I am 100% on board with this, as I already have feature branches of ggdist and tidybayes that I can't submit to cran because they depend on posterior :). Is it worth asking: is there anything missing from the CRAN milestone? Or conversely, anything on there that isn't necessary for the first CRAN release? e.g. nice-to-haves that wouldn't change the API in a backwards-incompatible way. |
I agree. I think one minor thing would be to decide what to do with the With regard to the CRAN milestone, I think issues #42, #77, and #105 could be dropped from the milestone and also handled later. The other issues we could try to fix more or less right away when somebody has time. |
I think we should decide whether to include chain info in
Agreed. I just went ahead removed them from the milestone (but if anyone disagrees we can add them back). |
I agree, we should probably add chain info to the |
With all issues of the CRAN milestone now closed, I think we can actually move towards the submission. @jgabry @mjskay @avehtari since you are authors of this package, I would like to get your explicit approval for the CRAN submission. Asking anybody reading this, is there anything that you think needs to be added to the first CRAN release? Specfically things that are much harder to change once things are on CRAN? |
Thanks Paul.
Approved! |
Should we use 1.0 as the version number for the CRAN release? |
Yes, I think we should move to 1.0 for the release. |
Approved as well, wholeheartedly! |
I've read this thread and checked some linked things and don't see or remember anything to comment. |
Ok, great! I will go ahead and initial the CRAN release. I will let you know how it goes. |
Thank you! |
We got feedback from CRAN. Here is what we need to fix still:
|
I'm happy to quickly write I also have a fix for a minor corner case in rvar matrix multiplication I ran into yesterday that I am about to submit a PR for if it fits under the wire (nothing big --- base vectors weren't being promoted to row/col vectors, so some operations that should have worked instead returned an error, forcing the user to promote manually). |
On return values: How much of a fight with CRAN do we want to get into over reserved-variables.Rd? It's not even a function, just a list of variable names, so it would be a little silly to have a |
Re: reserved-variables, I see that the |
I was feeling productive this afternoon so I proposed PRs for everything except the |
Thank you for those PRs. Just just merged all of them. With regard to the description, shall we just link to github? Or is there something else to link to? Shall we add a link at all? If not, I will add to the CRAN comments, that we don't have a reference (yet) and as such don't link to in the description. With regard to the license, I have no idea what we shall put under "ORGANIZATION". @jgabry you seem to be more experienced with licensing. Do you have any recommendation? |
Maaaybe section (d) of description could cite convergence metrics papers? But also I think saying we don't have a reference yet makes sense. |
Good idea, citing for example vehtari et al. 2020 for new Rhat, ESS etc. could make a lot of sense. |
I now simply added a blank |
Judging from the BSD3_clause CRAN template (https://cran.r-project.org/web/licenses/BSD_3_clause), it seems that they put |
My renv project seems to have automatically pulled the 1.0 version in which it seems that the ess_tail() function is yielding NA for even it's own example.
posterior GithubSHA1: ee38b68 |
This is related to #167. Do you mind posting there again and we continue the discussion there? |
Since I haven't heard anything to the contrary I go ahead and make sure that the LICENSE implied license (according to the CRAN BSD3 template) and our LICENSE.md match. I will go ahead and submit posterior to CRAN again today. |
Thanks Paul!
…On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 1:34 AM Paul-Christian Bürkner < ***@***.***> wrote:
Since I haven't heard anything to the contrary I go ahead and make sure
that the LICENSE implied license (according to the CRAN BD3 template) and
our LICENSE.md match.
I will go ahead and submit posterior to CRAN again today.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#165 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB3PQQ5F2GUZ4IPQBN4IHITTXPT6ZANCNFSM47GWTCNA>
.
|
posterior has been accepted by CRAN and should appear there soon. Very well done everyone! :-) |
Awesome! Very exciting :) |
Awesome indeed!
… |
Looks like it's on cran now:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/posterior/index.html
I'll go ahead and update the readme and website (version number,
installation instructions, etc.).
…On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 4:51 PM Jonah Sol Gabry ***@***.***> wrote:
Awesome indeed!
>
|
Looks like readme was already updated, so I'll just do the website
…On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 4:53 PM Jonah Sol Gabry ***@***.***> wrote:
Looks like it's on cran now:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/posterior/index.html
I'll go ahead and update the readme and website (version number,
installation instructions, etc.).
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 4:51 PM Jonah Sol Gabry ***@***.***> wrote:
> Awesome indeed!
>
>>
|
Also, I won't have time to do it myself until next week (I'm teaching a Stan short course this week), but if anyone has time to write a blog post about the package you can send it to me and I can post it on Andrew's blog right away. Or I can try to write something up next week when I have time. |
As a welcome from one of the CRAN members, we were immediately threatend that posterior will be removed from CRAN in two weeks notice if we don't fix one speed test that fails on some machines. :-D I will skip speed tests on CRAN (via I will handle the resubmission and also sequeeze in @mjskay's latest PR #179. |
Haha, of course ;)
Thanks for handling this.
…On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 1:27 AM Paul-Christian Bürkner < ***@***.***> wrote:
As a welcome from one of the CRAN members, we were immediately threatend
that posterior will be removed from CRAN in two weeks notice if we don't
fix one speed test that fails on some machines. :-D
I will skip speed tests on CRAN (via skip_on_cran) for this reason and we
should remember also to skip future speed tests on CRAN.
I will handle the resubmission and also sequeeze in @mjskay
<https://github.com/mjskay>'s latest PR #179
<#179>.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#165 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB3PQQ5N7IMSC6DRA6CJF4LTXU375ANCNFSM47GWTCNA>
.
|
I think posterior is getting close to the point where we should consider releasing the first CRAN version. I'm opening this issue so we have a place to discuss the things we need/want to get done before then.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: