Re: [racket-users] Rationale for package structure

But you can also define two single collection packages that use the same `(define collection "...")` within the info.rkt. And that allows you to add modules with single collection packages. Only tested locally but seems to work. ded...@gmail.com schrieb am Donnerstag, 14. Oktober 2021 um 21:45:15

Re: [racket-users] Rationale for package structure

It's been a while since I created a new package, but as of ~1 year ago, another advantage (or perhaps the same, from a different angle) of the multi-collection format was that it allowed third parties to add modules to the collections I defined. Eric On Sat, Oct 9, 2021, 1:58 PM 'Joel Dueck' via

Re: [racket-users] Rationale for package structure

I don't bother with the splitting because it's a *lot* of maintenance headache for little gain. My opinion is that we should take the collective effort we've poured into splitting packages and instead direct it at improving the compiler and package system to do a better job of automating this p

Re: [racket-users] Rationale for package structure

The --binary flag only works for the current release with the default catalog iirc. Cheers, Sam On Sat, Oct 9, 2021, 11:58 Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote: > I think it's so that `raco pkg install mypkg-lib` won't install > `racket-doc` if you use Minimal Racket? > > If you don't split `mypkg` to

Re: [racket-users] Rationale for package structure

Ah I see! So is there some heuristic for when you should try to play nice with Minimal Racket? Is it, ideally, “always”? Or is it mainly if you’re likely to be using the package on a server, CI, etc? On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 1:58:33 PM UTC-5 sorawe...@gmail.com wrote: > I think it's so t

Re: [racket-users] Rationale for package structure

I think it's so that `raco pkg install mypkg-lib` won't install `racket-doc` if you use Minimal Racket? If you don't split `mypkg` to `mypkg-lib` and `mypkg-doc`, but specify `deps` and `build-deps` correctly, `raco pkg install --binary mypkg` won't pull in `racket-doc` either. I don't know when t

[racket-users] Rationale for package structure

I’ve always used the single collection format [1] in my packages. However, I see a lot of package authors will use a multi-collection format and split the library, documentation and maybe tests out into separate collections. What are the benefits of splitting the main library and its documentat