On Sunday, 16 June 2019 03.09.41 WEST Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
Hi R-interested packagers and others,
So now the question is how to apply this. I expect there are social
concerns, i.e., discussing with the R maintainer, making a
Self-contained Change, etc. But for this email, I am mostly concerned
with the technical aspects:
1. Is R-devel the right place to put the script and RPM attribute file
(all R packages would normally depend on this)?
Either that or create a new package R-rpm-macros and have R-devel depending on
it (just like it happens for python).
2. Does this namespacing make sense?
What are your doubts here?
1) use a versioned dependency like R3.6dist(packageName);
2) refer to the repository R_cran(packageName)?
3. Are dashes in *namespaced* versions going to be a problem?
I do not think so. I remember in python one case where this happens:
# rpm -q --provides python3-dateutil
python3-dateutil = 1:2.8.0-1.fc30
python3.7dist(python-dateutil) = 2.8.0
python3dist(python-dateutil) = 2.8.0
4. Python had a flag to enable the automatic generator; do we need
this for R, and how was it implemented?
5. I expect this would need a rebuild of all packages to get the
dependencies right (because the regular rebuild is unordered); would
this need a side tag? Or would leaving it for the normal mass rebuild
just be fine?
I tend to the last option if we ensure that all R packages are rebuilt.
6. R only has two levels of dependencies (hard-require or suggested,
but not installed by default). Thus both build- and runtime-optional
packages are in Suggests; do we care about the extra Suggests?
Does dnf cares about Suggests?
According to dnf.conf the option install_weak_deps:
"When this option is set to True and a new package is about to be installed,
all packages linked by weak dependency relation (Recommends or Supplements
flags) with this package will pulled into the transaction. Default is True."
It does not refers Suggests...