Cronicle
The job scheduler's release stream is now almost entirely vulnerability patching and authorization hardening.
Comparison · Infra & APIs
goodpractice vs webfakes
A side-by-side editorial comparison of goodpractice and webfakes — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
Shared themes:r-package
goodpractice vs webfakes: at a glance
What is goodpractice?
The R package-quality checker returns from CRAN limbo with checks you can select by category.
goodpractice runs a battery of static checks over an R package — style, complexity, test coverage, documentation, DESCRIPTION hygiene — and reports what a reviewer would flag. The package was archived on CRAN, adopted by rOpenSci in 1.0.5, and version 1.1 is the first substantive release since: every check now belongs to one of 16 named groups, discoverable via all_check_groups() and selectable via checks_by_group(), with group-level exclusion through an option or environment variable and new default_checks() and tidyverse_checks() presets.
What is webfakes?
A fake web server for tests that keeps closing the gap with the real thing.
webfakes runs a real HTTP server inside R tests so packages can exercise network code without hitting the internet. Its releases follow a consistent logic: find a class of behaviour that only the real internet could reproduce, then implement it locally. HTTPS arrived in 1.4.0; before that the httpbin clone reached full parity with the Python original, and a fake git HTTP server landed alongside CGI middleware. The most recent release, 1.5.0, is about the server's own rough edges — keep-alive timeouts, locale-independent HTTP date parsing, and trailing-slash route matching.
goodpractice vs webfakes: editorial side-by-side
goodpractice
0.0INFRA · APIS
The R package-quality checker returns from CRAN limbo with checks you can select by category.
◆ Current state
goodpractice runs a battery of static checks over an R package — style, complexity, test coverage, documentation, DESCRIPTION hygiene — and reports what a reviewer would flag. The package was archived on CRAN, adopted by rOpenSci in 1.0.5, and version 1.1 is the first substantive release since: every check now belongs to one of 16 named groups, discoverable via all_check_groups() and selectable via checks_by_group(), with group-level exclusion through an option or environment variable and new default_checks() and tidyverse_checks() presets.
◆ Where it's heading
The direction is from a monolithic verdict toward a configurable one. Previously the practical choices were run everything or name individual checks; grouping makes partial adoption tractable, which matters because the full battery is opinionated enough that teams either accept all of it or ignore the tool. The tidyverse_checks() preset makes that explicit — the package is acknowledging that its defaults encode one house style among several. Earlier releases pointed the same way with a configurable cyclomatic complexity limit and adjustable output length.
◆ Prediction
With grouping and presets in place, the natural next step is per-project persistent configuration so exclusions live in the repository rather than in an option or environment variable.
webfakes
0.0INFRA · APIS
A fake web server for tests that keeps closing the gap with the real thing.
◆ Current state
webfakes runs a real HTTP server inside R tests so packages can exercise network code without hitting the internet. Its releases follow a consistent logic: find a class of behaviour that only the real internet could reproduce, then implement it locally. HTTPS arrived in 1.4.0; before that the httpbin clone reached full parity with the Python original, and a fake git HTTP server landed alongside CGI middleware. The most recent release, 1.5.0, is about the server's own rough edges — keep-alive timeouts, locale-independent HTTP date parsing, and trailing-slash route matching.
◆ Where it's heading
The package is converging on being indistinguishable from a real server for test purposes, which is the only way it stays useful — every unsupported protocol feature is a piece of code someone cannot test offline. The remaining work has visibly shifted from missing endpoints to correctness details: date header parsing under unusual locales, keep-alive tuning, request body handling across content types.
◆ Prediction
Expect continued fidelity work against real-server behaviour rather than new app types, with HTTP/2 or authentication schemes the most plausible next gaps given the direction HTTPS opened. The entries do not indicate a specific planned feature.
Alternatives to goodpractice and webfakes
Other Infra & APIs products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either goodpractice or webfakes.
Helm
Helm runs two release trains in lockstep while v3 walks toward end-of-life.
quarto
Quarto's editor extension is quietly becoming Positron-first while keeping VS Code parity.
q2
Ten releases in six days, methodically porting Quarto's surface into a Rust binary.
pkgcache
The metadata cache under pak now speaks to authenticated and corporate repositories.
packrat
R's old dependency manager now runs on a vendored copy of its own successor.
See all goodpractice alternatives → · See all webfakes alternatives →
Recent activity from goodpractice and webfakes
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
- 2mo agogoodpracticeChecks organized into 16 selectable groups with presets ⚡
- 2mo agowebfakesKeep-alive tuning, locale-safe HTTP dates, looser routes
- 1y agowebfakesHTTPS support lands in the fake server ⚡
- 1y agowebfakesNew decode_url server option
- 2y agogoodpracticerOpenSci takes over maintenance, package restored to CRAN
- 2y agowebfakesAdds a fake git HTTP server and CGI middleware
- 2y agowebfakesFixes tmpl_glue() on affected macOS builds
- 3y agowebfakeshttpbin clone reaches parity with the Python original
- 4y agogoodpracticeConfigurable cyclomatic complexity limit and output length
- 5y agogoodpracticePackage logo added
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between goodpractice and webfakes?
Both compete on the same themes — r-package — within Infra & APIs. goodpractice and webfakes are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Is goodpractice better than webfakes?
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. goodpractice and webfakes are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Infra & APIs products to evaluate alongside.
What are the best alternatives to goodpractice?
Top goodpractice alternatives in Infra & APIs are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "goodpractice alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/goodpractice for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
What are the best alternatives to webfakes?
Top webfakes alternatives in Infra & APIs are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "webfakes alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/webfakes for the full list with editorial commentary on each.