Not much reason to have */R-cran-* ports

[Eugene Grosbein]

21.03.2018 3:32, Yuri wrote:

> On 03/20/18 11:20, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> It is a bit funny you are bothered on 250 R-cran-* ports when we have 1908 p5-* ports,
>> 964 py-* ports, 600 rubygem-* ports and 280 hs-* ports in the single ports/devel category.
>>
>> Are you planning to ban and remove p5 ports too? Most of them should be from CPAN.
>> We had BSDPAN for some time even...
> 
> 
> You are missing the key differences:
> 
> 1. Python and perl ports represent individually run software with their own executables,
> when R doesn't. R packages are only useful in the context of R, as building blocks of larger R
> programs only runnable in R environment. R packages are much more dependent on environment.

This is exactly the same for most of devel/p5-* ports as they are just Perl libraries (modules)
only useful in the context of Perl as building blocks of larger Perl programs only runnable
in Perl environment.