On 5/5/21, Siddhartha Kasivajhula <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you, that helped me understand the issue. I've made the appropriate > changes so hopefully that'll do it. > > This is reminding me that in python package distribution land, you are able > to explicitly indicate which files make it into the package in a file > analogous to info.rkt (setup.py, but also MANIFEST.in which allows you to > bundle non-source files, I believe). Files besides these simply reside in > the repository but don't make it into either source distributions or > binaries. This could be a desirable feature to emulate in raco, since it > would mean that (1) test modules need not be included as part of a > collection even if present in the repo, (2) I've noticed that some Racket > packages use a lib/test/docs breakdown with 3 separate packages; this seems > non-ideal to me since they need to reside in 3 separate repos even though > the non-source repos are essentially metadata (despite being written in > full-fledged languages like scribble). By supporting something like a > "source-include-paths" info.rkt declaration with a list of paths (similar > to compile-omit-paths and test-include-paths), the tests and docs could all > reside in the same source repo, without their (necessarily) becoming part > of the installed package/collection. Any thoughts on this?
lib + tests + docs can all live in the same repo. For example: https://github.com/97jaz/gregor It does take some effort to get the organization right, but I don't have any better ideas. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CAFUu9R7SPEribrYXBXDxEx6gtzWit247AU4foO8iWsuGH1-OxQ%40mail.gmail.com.
