Closed mdsumner closed 3 years ago
Maybe ignore the non-units column in to_munich()
? Perhaps more flexibility is ok when a user can pass in any sf data frame?
(edited for tone)
Sorry for breaking eixport on CRAN, they asked me for justification and it was accepted. What I don't understand is how you've been able to submit updates in recent weeks, and what happened to the silicate/sf breakage. But, all good from my perspective - happy to help if problems arise.
Hello @mdsumner Somehow I did not see your messages. I believe around March 22 I was moving from Sao Paulo to south Brazil with limited internet connection. Thank you very much with your PR. I remember that I had some problems with this function and CRAN. Around that time I didi not have time to dive deeper into the problem, but I remember that I waited your new silicate release and magically solve to_munich problems :D
I`m not using to_munich too often, hence I havent see this. I will check this in the following days. Thank you so much
Actually, the last version was submitted on April 16, and the requirements are: silicate (≥ 0.3), sfheaders (≥ 0.2.1)
This example in
to_munich()
fails becausepath_
is an integer in new silicate:It's causing an error on CRAN submission for silicate:
https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/silicate_0.3.0_20200321_221157/reverseDependencies/summary.txt
I don't really understand how you were able to update the package in the last few days given the error with crs in silicate, but here breaks the assumption in
to_munich()
that everything has "units".I suggest either , don't error on everything having "units" - or edit the above line to be
submitted as a PR #55