Should we fail on R CMD check NOTES in check-full?

Open
#381 27 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Newbie friendliness
25/100
Issue type
Feature
Clarity
Needs clarification
Activity status
Stale
Tech stack
github-actions, r, typescript
Domain
ci-cd

Research direction

Start by tracing the check-full workflow or action entry point and how it handles R CMD check NOTES; review the existing 27-comment discussion for the unresolved decision. Done means an agreed behavior for whether NOTES make the check fail, with the resulting change documented or implemented.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

blocked feature

Warning seems like the right default for most package developers, but I keep getting surprised that GHA doesn't fail on NOTES when working on tidyverse packages.

Dominant language
TypeScript
Stars
1.1k
Forks
234
Avg merge
2h 34m
Merged PRs (30d)
3

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from r-lib/actions

All issues in r-lib/actions

Similar issues

More TypeScript issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.