-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Sampling tests to strict #150
Comments
Yes, I'll try to do that at the end of today :) |
Hi @rstub, is this something I should change for a single test file, or for all test files? |
Only |
Will submit to CRAN once the CI tests pass. |
Hi, unfortunately the tests haven't passed yet. I might only find time to debug this weekend. Would this cause you any larger inconveniences @rstub ? If yes, I would try to find some time before, but unfortunately I am quite busy in the next evenings. |
So far I have not been given any time-line from CRAN, so it should be OK if you can do this next weekend. |
I have now heard from CRAN: They either want to publish dqrng 0.4 now or ask me to resubmit once fixed packages are available. Publishing now would (potentially) break fwildclusterboot and you would then be given a 2 week(?) timeline to provide a fixed version. Would that be OK with you? |
Yes, please go ahead! |
The first failures are coming in now that dqrng 0.4.0 is on CRAN: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_fwildclusterboot.html. I am confused why they are getting that failure repeatedly. For me it happened only sometimes. |
Thanks. I will tackle this this weekend :) |
😞 I guess this got you tossed off CRAN now. Let me know if I can help but it looks like you know what to do. |
Yes, but it's not really this, I just didn't do it on time / last minute and then of course an incorrect url bit me... I'll take the long weekend here in DE to submit a new version that has been long in the making =) thanks for checking it, definitely encouraging to put in the effort to get the package back on cran! |
It can happen that the difference in the confidence intervals is larger than the
0.005
you are expecting:Created on 2024-05-13 with reprex v2.1.0
Running the the two
boottest()
repeatedly w/o fixing the seed I see differences up to0.007
. This probably explains the surprising results I got in daqana/dqrng#80 when doing reverse dependency checks for the new version ofdqrng
.Could you upload a version of
fwildclusterboot
that only changes the the expectation w.r.t. the confidence interval?Note: I am basing my analysis on v0.13, which I think corresponds to the current CRAN version.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: