It's been a while since I created a new package, but as of ~1 year ago, another advantage (or perhaps the same, from a different angle) of the multi-collection format was that it allowed third parties to add modules to the collections I defined.
Eric On Sat, Oct 9, 2021, 1:58 PM 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users < [email protected]> wrote: > I’ve always used the single collection format [1] in my packages. > > However, I see a lot of package authors will use a multi-collection format > and split the library, documentation and maybe tests out into separate > collections. > > What are the benefits of splitting the main library and its documentation > into separate collections? > > [1]: > https://docs.racket-lang.org/pkg/Package_Concepts.html#%28part._concept~3amulti-collection%29 > > -- > 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/6ea9f50e-0d4f-4800-bc17-d31979a614cfn%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/6ea9f50e-0d4f-4800-bc17-d31979a614cfn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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/CAORuSUwGH0vAZvx-Y7jQNEqzwhks8X-%2B0y4t_m6Nc_%3DTWW45YA%40mail.gmail.com.
