From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Lemmer Webber Subject: Re: Racket packages: formerly Move DrRacket to a separate output? Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:23:18 -0400 Message-ID: <875zl471sp.fsf@dustycloud.org> References: <87efdx6nzt.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87pnxgjwfx.fsf@gnu.org> <87bm90rn22.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20191004154658.5jswjutbcfe6zsig@thebird.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40601) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iGTAh-0001Ro-Fp for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:23:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iGTAf-00062P-5C for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:23:22 -0400 In-reply-to: <20191004154658.5jswjutbcfe6zsig@thebird.nl> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Pjotr Prins Cc: guix-devel I think nobody has written a Racket importer. I have it as a longstanding background TODO task but clearly haven't found the time... despite the fact that I desperately want the feature. I'm just desperate for a lot of things right now! ;) - Chris Pjotr Prins writes: > 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 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 dependenc= ies >> >> by itself. >> > >> > I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s a matter of being an =E2=80=9Cadvan= ced=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 stripped >> >> 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