From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pjotr Prins <pjotr.public12@thebird.nl>
Subject: Racket packages: formerly Move DrRacket to a separate output?
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 10:46:58 -0500
Message-ID: <20191004154658.5jswjutbcfe6zsig@thebird.nl>
References: <87efdx6nzt.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87pnxgjwfx.fsf@gnu.org>
 <87bm90rn22.fsf@dustycloud.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42019)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <pjotr2019@thebird.nl>) id 1iGPtT-0005dU-JS
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 11:53:25 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <pjotr2019@thebird.nl>) id 1iGPtR-0008OT-Sz
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 11:53:23 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87bm90rn22.fsf@dustycloud.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
 <guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Christopher Lemmer Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

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 Court=C3=A8s writes:
>=20
> > Hello Pierre,
> >
> > Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> skribis:
> >
> >> Wouldn't it make sense to move DrRacket to a separate output?  I tak=
e
> >> that most advanced users use something else (who said Emacs?) and
> >> DrRacket might eat up a decent amount of disk space + extra dependen=
cies
> >> by itself.
> >
> > I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s a matter of being an =E2=80=9Cadva=
nced=E2=80=9D 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 strippe=
d
> >> from DrRacket:
> >>
> >> 	https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?q=3Dracket
> >
> > Such a split sounds good to me.  What do Chris and other Racketeers
> > think?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ludo=E2=80=99.
>=20
> 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":
>=20
> https://download.racket-lang.org/
>=20
> 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.
>=20
>  - Chris
>=20
>=20
>=20