Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > Well... Tha was ... instructive ... > > We see to have two consistent options to keep R a standard package : > > 1. Keep R as a standard package, including the binaries. This involves : > * make xz a standard package ; > * port the old-style pcre package as a new-style standard package ; > * make R depend on xz and pcre ; > 2. Keep an interface to R as a standard package. This involves : > * make a working system's R installation a a prerequisite of R ; > * possibly making this prerequisite (R's)-version-specific. > > The first solution guarantees that any existing code using R can still > be run (modulo R's evolution) but involves maintaining a not-so-small R > binary for an indefinite future... It also involves a duplication of R > packages libraries between system's and Sage's installations, which can > be a non-trivial amount (my *small* use of R packages amounts to about > 360 packages, 29 among them being "standard" R packages). This cvcan be > alleviated by using Sage's R as the system's R installation (I didn't do > that until now for fear of sage's problems : R is my daily bread and > butter...). > > The second one breaks this guarantee, and introduces the possibility of > version incompatibilities between R and Sage.. > > We could also make R an optional package, with (again) two options : > > * Maintain a R optional binary, depending on xz and pcre. > * Maintain an R optional interface. > > > Making R optional *will* break existing code.
How do you come to that conclusion? Making R optional just means people using R (or the interface to it) would have to "manually" (=explicitly) install it then (or in the future, perhaps have to configure Sage '--with-R' or something like that). -leif > This boils down to : > > * R binary standard > * R interface standard > * R binary optional > * R interface optional > > My vote goes to R binary standard for now (dissecting the current > package to separate binary and interface and creating the required > Makefile modifications is not trivial) ; my second choice would be R > interface standard, if we can accept the possibility of R-induced > inconsistencies...) > > What are your choices ? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
