Skip to content
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

Add support for Artifactory archive types #583

Open
cfmack opened this issue Nov 13, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

Add support for Artifactory archive types #583

cfmack opened this issue Nov 13, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@cfmack
Copy link

cfmack commented Nov 13, 2019

In RTFACT-17392, Artifactory has a bug dealing with how CRAN archives. While that is indeed a bug, I have found in 3.5.1 install.packages, varying implementation of REMOTES, and/or versions of packrat, each package attempt to solve these varying implementations differently. Some need to reference a "archive.rds". Others must have a package.rds while others sufficiently use a PACKAGE file.

The ask and the associated PR is allowing the loosening of these restrictions to be backwards compatible. Remotes has a similar bug and PR

@pyltime
Copy link

pyltime commented Jun 8, 2023

This has come up with a customer using Posit Connect in support ticket 90580.

@kevinushey
Copy link
Contributor

We have a solution for this on the renv side; perhaps we could port the relevant code to Packrat? That code lives here: https://github.com/rstudio/renv/blob/029c4457c0c2846eafd9a1da8bf3f95daf49fe45/R/retrieve.R#L806-L860

@jimhester
Copy link
Contributor

The recent version of Connect which bundles a newer version of packrat exposed us to this issue as well. It would be great to either adapt the code from the linked PR or the linked renv solution to support this.

In the short term I have patched the vendored version of packrat for our use, but it would be great to avoid this workaround and use the one bundled with Connect.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants