Updating the Description file Date field?

[bgreenwell]

Is it possible to add an option when building/checking a package to automatically update the Date field in the description file? An outdated Date fields seems to be a common mistake in the submission of packages to CRAN (I know I forget to do so often); adding this option would probably go a long way in reducing that error.

[gaborcsardi]

The Date field is not needed, you can just remove it completely. CRAN will add their own Date/Publication field to the package they put in the repository.

[bgreenwell]

I was not aware of that, thanks for the tip!

[melindahiggins2000]

I agree. It would be nice for the Date to be automatically loaded into the DESCRIPTION file by default. That way (for example) citation("tidyr") won't throw the warning message that

Warning messages:
1: In citation("tidyr") :
  no date field in DESCRIPTION file of package ‘tidyr’
2: In citation("tidyr") :
  could not determine year for ‘tidyr’ from package DESCRIPTION file

The current citation for the tidyr package lists the date as NA

Hadley Wickham (NA). tidyr: Easily Tidy Data with
  `spread()` and `gather()` Functions. R package
  version 0.6.0.9000. https://github.com/hadley/tidyr

This will most likely generate nagging comments from journal reviewers when citing R packages in manuscripts/publications.

[jimhester]

@melindahiggins2000 That behavior will only happen when installing the package with install_github(), if downloaded from CRAN the package will have a Date/Publication field that is used.

citation("tidyr")
#> 
#> To cite package 'tidyr' in publications use:
#> 
#>   Hadley Wickham (2016). tidyr: Easily Tidy Data with `spread()`
#>   and `gather()` Functions. R package version 0.6.0.
#>   https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tidyr
#> 
#> A BibTeX entry for LaTeX users is
#> 
#>   @Manual{,
#>     title = {tidyr: Easily Tidy Data with `spread()` and `gather()` Functions},
#>     author = {Hadley Wickham},
#>     year = {2016},
#>     note = {R package version 0.6.0},
#>     url = {https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tidyr},
#>   }

we could add this same field to the package description when we install it from GitHub, which would fix the behavior you describe.

[melindahiggins2000]

Ahh good point - I see now the difference in the CRAN vs development Github versions. I just think in general it is good practice to track the date of the current version in use and when cited. Thank you for the clarification.

[dracodoc]

@jimhester If I'm understanding correctly, this is not implemented yet

we could add this same field to the package description when we install it from GitHub

I think that can actually be very helpful, not just for citation usage.

• This will not conflict with CRAN version since CRAN just ignore it.
• This is still very useful because a lot of packages now deliver through install_github now, and lots of users just use the github version instead of CRAN version.
• This kind of timestamp should be managed automatically, and the best place for this date is the package building process.
• For github hosted packages, version is often not enough. A build date is more accurate and useful.

[jvcasillas]

Adding to what has been mentioned above, I believe it would be useful for the date field to be updated automatically (specifically, for use with citation) because it is often the case that one needs to cite a package that is only on github, i.e., not on cran.

[katrinleinweber]

Why build date, rather than timestamp of the commit from which it was built? I'd compared that with the publication date of an article vs. the timestamp of the publisher-generated PDF that I download.

Also: can the version be mapped back to a git commit in each case? When using the GitHub-Zenodo integration and being stringent about release tagging, it always can be, can't it?

[lock]

This old issue has been automatically locked. If you believe you have found a related problem, please file a new issue (with reprex) and link to this issue. https://reprex.tidyverse.org/