On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:00:24AM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> I’d like to keep it the way it is. In CRAN there are a number of
> packages with very similar names such as “graph” and “rgraph”, or “utils”
> and “R.utils”. There is also a great number of R packages that happen
> to start with “R
Andreas Enge writes:
> when tentatively calling "guix refresh", I saw a number of packages
> called "r-r-...", for instance "r-r-oo". Should this not be simplified
> to "r-oo"? We do not have separate packaging rules for R, but in analogy
> with python and perl, it would make sense to preprend "
Hello,
when tentatively calling "guix refresh", I saw a number of packages
called "r-r-...", for instance "r-r-oo". Should this not be simplified
to "r-oo"? We do not have separate packaging rules for R, but in analogy
with python and perl, it would make sense to preprend "r-" and at the
same time
