What is the status of creating Racket packages. For a REST API server I have two dependencies:
: raco pkg install https://github.com/dmac/spin.git : raco pkg install https://github.com/BourgondAries/memo.git what is the recommended way of packaging them in GNU Guix? Pj. On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 01:44:37PM -0400, Christopher Lemmer Webber wrote: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > > > Hello Pierre, > > > > Pierre Neidhardt <m...@ambrevar.xyz> skribis: > > > >> Wouldn't it make sense to move DrRacket to a separate output? I take > >> that most advanced users use something else (who said Emacs?) and > >> DrRacket might eat up a decent amount of disk space + extra dependencies > >> by itself. > > > > I don’t think it’s a matter of being an “advanced” user or not (DrRacket > > is really impressive, with a macro stepper and all sorts of bells and > > whistles), but I agree with the rationale. :-) > > > >> Arch Linux provides racket and racket-minimal: the latter is stripped > >> from DrRacket: > >> > >> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?q=racket > > > > Such a split sounds good to me. What do Chris and other Racketeers > > think? > > > > Cheers, > > Ludo’. > > I'm ok with splitting out racket-minimal and racket, which is a common > convention these days... even Racket's download page provides "Racket" > and "Minimal Racket": > > https://download.racket-lang.org/ > > I'd take the least effort route to doing that though... we aren't ready > to break each of the Racket "core" packages into their own packages and > I don't think that would need to hold this back. > > - Chris > > >
