Re: State of shiny-server packaging
On 16 September 2018 at 18:57, Philip Rinn wrote:
| the packaging effort for shiny-server stalled some month ago. I totally lost
| interest in packaging it as I now use shinyproxy[1] at $work.
|
| As we are heading towards the freeze, I think it's time to discuss how to proceed.
| Getting shiny-server into Debian is still a lot of work, see [2]. Actually only
| one out of 13 nodejs packages that need to be packaged hit the archive.
|
| Is anyone willing to step in and finish the work? Andreas, are you still interested?
|
| If no one steps in until end of October I'll file a RM bug for node-pinkyswear and
| close the ITP/RFP bugs that are listed in [2].
Yes. Not everything that exists in open source land needs to be in Debian.
Some things are simply hard to package. Just how Tobias et al bundled Shiny
in their (competing, but also both free-as-in-beer + commercially supported)
shinyproxy (which I do understand is awesome for larger deployments) so have
we bundled Shiny inside the (Docker-based) Rocker Project [3] and A TON of
people just use those containers. Has the side benefit that we were actually
granted permission to distribute shiny therein. Otherwise one can just do
what I usually do and just install the provided .deb of shiny-server.
Dirk
[3] https://www.rocker-project.org/
| Best,
| Philip
|
|
| [1] https://www.shinyproxy.io
| [2] https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/shiny-server/wikis/Packaging-ToDo
|
| x[DELETED ATTACHMENT signature.asc, application/pgp-signature]
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Reply to: