Re: Bug#819343: ITP: r-cran-dplyr -- A Grammar of Data Manipulation for GNU R
On 29 March 2016 at 08:28, Andreas Tille wrote:
| Hi Chris,
|
| On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 08:45:41PM -0400, Chris Lawrence wrote:
| > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> wrote:
| > > Thanks for this ITP since it is also on my list of needed packages for
| > > r-cran-treescape which needs several dependencies. I have noticed
| > > that its even in NEW. I wonder how you was able to build it without
| > > r-cran-bh since I also tried to package r-cran-dplyr[1] but I had the
| > > impression that r-cran-bh (#819389) would be required.
| >
| > The short answer is... I cheated.
|
| Ahhh. :-)
|
| > I edited out the BH reference in LinkingTo in DESCRIPTION and made the
| > source package depend on libboost-all-dev (>= 1.58). Since all BH does
| > is package a subset of libboost-all-dev, it works even though it's a
| > minor hack of the upstream source. In principle, we should be able to
| > do the same with anything that uses LinkingTo that isn't (yet)
| > packaged with an r-cran-* shell package but we have Debian packages
| > for.
| >
| > Dirk and I did talk about putting together an r-cran-bh that didn't
| > needlessly duplicate the libboost-*-dev packages it brings in, but I
| > don't know where that stands.
|
| I talked about this with Dirk[1] and may be I should have done this for
| the moment as well. Meanwhile Dirk has ITPed r-cran-bh (#819389) and
| has uploaded it to new - so this should be dealt with hopefully soon.
It is messy and I can see it two ways. It is good not to double up installed
size. It is bad to have a package behave differently -- eg users of a 'fake'
r-cran-bh in Debian would see a complete Boost and be tempted to include
headers users of the other one do not see. Plus, small deltas. BH is at
1.60.0; Debian still uses 1.58.0.
Dirk
| It would be nice to have a look into your packaging anyway in the mean
| time. So finding it in some VCS (see below) would be helpful.
|
| > > It would be great if you would move your packaging to some VCS (for
| > > instance Debian Science). I would volunteer to commit autopkg stuff
| > > which I've just prepared[1].
| > >
| > > Kind regards
| > >
| > > Andreas.
| > >
| > > [1] svn://anonscm.debian.org/debian-med/trunk/packages/R/r-cran-dplyr/trunk/
| >
| > One of these decades I'll have to learn how to use VCSes for
| > packaging.
|
| I'd recommend using Git in this case since there seem to be a tendency
| inside Debian into this direction. While you can see from the URL above
| I started in SVN. The rationale is that R packaging is in most cases
| simple enough that we keep only the debian/ dir which is in line with
| the usual workflow in SVN while the typical workflow in Git is to store
| upstream source and packaging in one repository.
|
| Since I think r-cran-dplyr would be sensible inside the Debian Science
| team you can read how to do it in the Debian Science policy document[2].
| I would volunteer to inject your packaging into Debian Science Git if
| this would help you in the beginning. If you want me to do this simply
| put somewhere online to enable me downloading it (while it resides in
| new).
|
| Kind regards
|
| Andreas.
|
| [2] https://debian-science.alioth.debian.org/debian-science-policy.html#idp45010192
|
| --
| http://fam-tille.de
|
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Reply to: