On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 06:57 -0700, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > 1. I'm not sure the idea of integrating, say, R packages, into Portage > is a good one. Debian has a lot of R packages in their repository, but > that's mainly because one developer, Dirk Eddelbuettel, took that on as > a personal mission. For that matter, I don't know that Portage really > *needs* to have "tight" integration with any other package management > systems. In other words, does a CPAN Perl package really need to be > wrapped in an ebuild, or could a Gentoo user just as easily install CPAN > packages directly? The same goes for Ruby gems -- it's only marginally > more convenient for a Rubyist to have gems in Portage, and you'll never > have them *all. If you have the developer resources, sure, why not, but > aren't there better things the developers could be doing? In any event, > I use R and its packages heavily and don't see the need to "emerge > Rcmdr" -- R's native package management system is fine. So is Ruby's > "rubygems" package management system.
Not saying 100 R packages => 100 ebuilds, but passing proper flags, building deps and all could be wrapped in a nice gentoo way (btw, is paludis doing this?). Anyway this was just a project idea in a todo list and should go to another thread, or the corresponding bug. > 2. Don't be afraid to kick something out of the distro if nobody wants > to maintain it. It's no big deal to install a package from upstream > source. As far as I'm concerned, in most cases the only difference is > that it ends up in /usr/local instead of in /usr and I have to manually > load the dependencies. This is also an area where we could use some help. Do you feel any packages are unmaintained or could be removed? If yes, file a bug, say your word on the wiki, ... -- Sébastien
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
