Bug#617296: Any Progress with RStudio?
On 14 May 2014 at 18:45, Rogério Brito wrote:
| Dear Dirk and others,
|
| On May 14 2014, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 14 May 2014 at 17:08, Rogério Brito wrote:
| > | Anyway, I can push the *super* embrionary packaging that I have so far. I
| > | would like some help with the maintainance of this package since I have
| > | barely any time left with the amount of packages that I maintain.
| >
| > I am semi-regularly IM'ing or emailing with the RStudio founder whom I'll
| > meet tomorrow. I also have pretty good contacts with a number of other
| > RStudio developers and engineers.
|
| That's great. I would love to know what to do about RStudio to convince it
| to (while building) to use some off-the-tree packages like hunspell, mathjax
| and possibly others.
|
| > You want to look at the current dev packages, eg (in binary)
| > http://rstudio.org/download/daily/
| > which, inter alia, contain a very cooked-up local build of pandoc to be able
| > to get the very, very latest pandoc binary without any depends.
|
| Thanks. Somehow I missed that directory.
|
| > I am not sure how ready this is even for Debian unstable, and they _do_
|
| You probably meant experimental here?
Maybe :)
| > provide ready-made .deb packages that users like myself deploy.
|
| I installed and started using rstudio and I have never been so impressed
| with an IDE like this in ages. There are so many goodies with it that it
| would be a real pity to not have it in Debian.
Yes. And eg that newest pandoc stuff and their underlying rmarkdown package
is mindboggling as well. Those guys are really good.
| That being said, I don't think that the FTP masters would let us upload
| something that duplicates a lot of stuff, but that shouldn't prevent us (or
Agreed. But whenever I bring it up with JJ et al the answer is ... that they
just need too much stuff that is too current ... Eg a whole slew of Qt things.
Might be best to file a bug report with them. I'll ask JJ tomorrow who
besides him a good contact would be.
I presume you started off their GitHub repo?
| the interested parties) from working on the package and start solving the
| small problems (like those that I mentioned before), detecting unpackaged
| dependencies (e.g., knitr and possibly many others) etc.
|
| > I can ask tomorrow, but RStudio is still a pretty fast moving target.
|
| Thanks. It would be nice to know if they are moving from Qt4 to Qt5 in the
| short time or not. Also, if they would like to see RStudio packaged
| independently from them.
|
| And there are probably other smaller issues like linking rstudio with
| openssl, given that rstudio is licensed under the agplv3 and I didn't see
| any licensing exception while skimming the sources (but it may be there).
Dunno either.
Dirk
--
Dirk Eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com
Reply to: