'-light' vs. '-minimal' packages

[Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>]

Ludovic Courtès (2015-09-02 16:09 +0300) wrote:

> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:
>
>> An alternative is to inherit from the “r” package in “statistics.scm”.
>>
>>     (define-module (my own packages)
>>       #:use-module (guix packages)
>>       #:use-module (gnu packages statistics)
>>       #:use-module (srfi srfi-1))
>>
>>     (define-public my-r
>>       (package (inherit r)
>>         (name "my-r")
>>         ;; modify only the inputs here
>>         (native-inputs (alist-delete "texlive" (package-native-inputs r)))
>>         (inputs (alist-delete "icedtea6" (package-inputs r)))))
>
> Speaking of which: should we get rid of icedtea6:jdk in the default R
> package (closure size: 1 GiB), and maybe of TeX Live (4 GiB)?  Or should
> we provide, say, ‘r-light’ with the definition above?

We have ‘bash-light’ and ‘wpa-supplicant-light’; ‘bioperl-minimal’ and
‘cups-minimal’.  I think we should stick to a single name for such
light/minimal packages.  (I prefer "…-minimal")

-- 
Alex