I think the recent changes for checking return sections in Rd files might be triggering a false positive. Specifically I'm thinking of man pages that document the package itself, which I wouldn't expect to have a return section.
These are described in r-pkgs.org and I have a specific example in Rarr which is now triggering a warning in BiocCheck when it did not in the past.
If you agree it's a false positive, I wonder if you can use BiocCheck:::docType(rd) == "package" somewhere to test for this scenario.
Hi @LiNk-NY
I think the recent changes for checking return sections in Rd files might be triggering a false positive. Specifically I'm thinking of man pages that document the package itself, which I wouldn't expect to have a return section.
These are described in r-pkgs.org and I have a specific example in Rarr which is now triggering a warning in BiocCheck when it did not in the past.
If you agree it's a false positive, I wonder if you can use
BiocCheck:::docType(rd) == "package"
somewhere to test for this scenario.Cheers, Mike