search

ropensci / RNeXML

Implementing semantically rich NeXML I/O in R
https://docs.ropensci.org/RNeXML
Other
13 stars 9 forks source link

Plans for update release to CRAN? #185

Closed hlapp closed 5 years ago

hlapp commented 5 years ago

The Rphenoscape package is dependent on the recent fixes resolving #171 and #172. Hence, I'm wondering when these could be reasonably expected to make it to CRAN? Are there other changes or fixes that should be in the same version upgrade? Should we create a milestone to track these?

Either way, Rphenoscape needs to depend on a version of RNeXML > 2.1.2. Would it be OK to increment the version on the master branch, say to 2.1.3-0 or something similar if further changes would be coming before the 2.1.3. release on CRAN?

cboettig commented 5 years ago

@hlapp Sure, I think we could get a new release on CRAN in relatively short order. None of the open issues seem mission critical to me, so I'd propose we prepare a release at the current state.

Version wise, I can bump to 2.1.2.99 (R thinks that 2.1.3-0 > 2.1.3, try compareVersion()) for now, and make it 2.1.3 at release.

Other steps:

hlapp commented 5 years ago

BTW what's needed for version bump is only that the version it has satisfies being greater than or equal to 2.1.3 (if that's what I make minimally required for rphenoscape). As you say, 2.1.3.0 would accomplish that :smile:

In the meantime, I am using the Remotes: tag in DESCRIPTION to request that the RNeXML dependency be installed from Github. This accomplishes the desired outcome for those who don't have RNeXML installed already. Requiring RNeXML >= 2.1.3 would have the nice benefit of flagging the need to upgrade for those who have it installed already.

It also turns out that in fact we're not release-ready here yet. The issue with polymorphic states is in fact not fixed yet. Issue and pull request will follow.

Yes I can add the NEWS.md line once we're there.

cboettig commented 5 years ago

Right, I just don't want it 2.1.3.0 right now, and then change it to 2.1.3 when I release it to CRAN, because that second change would be going backwards in the sequence and create confusion. (A four-position version with .99 or similar in the fourth position is also a common practice in R packages, which makes it easy to spot when someone is running a CRAN version vs a development version).

Ok, glad I didn't jump the gun then. thanks much for the pull requests!

hlapp commented 5 years ago

It also turns out that in fact we're not release-ready here yet. The issue with polymorphic states is in fact not fixed yet. Issue and pull request will follow.

Issue is #186. The solution I think will by definition need to (at least partially) address #175.

cboettig commented 5 years ago

Are we good to prepare a release now that #188 has resolved #186 and #175? Think we just need some text for the NEWs.md release notes regarding the resolution of these issues.

hlapp commented 5 years ago

I looks like especially with #191 fixed in #192 we're good now. #193 is icing 😄 (or gravy, if you're that kind of guy 😁).

cboettig commented 5 years ago

Great! Can you give me a blurb for NEWS.md release notes that summarizes the get_character() changes? It can also link back to the relevant issue threads directly for details. Then I can probably prepare a release to CRAN pretty soon

cboettig commented 5 years ago

@hlapp Are we ready to make a release to CRAN? Just lemme know what should go into the NEWS.md

hlapp commented 5 years ago

@hlapp Are we ready to make a release to CRAN? Just lemme know what should go into the NEWS.md

Yes, just tied up this week with teaching,

hlapp commented 5 years ago

I think we are done here, @cboettig ?