A use case image that builds on the ubuntu/rstudio image [^1], adding the popular suite of packages from Hadley, along with the dependencies to make them most useful.
Questions:
Does this image include the RStudio packages like rmarkdown & knitr, (and hence pandoc, maybe some tex?) or is that a separate use-case?
Similarly, does this image include all the LaTeX libraries needed for generating pdfs (e.g. with rmarkdown). Presumably basic Sweave users would have enough LaTeX libraries in r-devel, but the default pandoc templates use more.
My intuition for now is yes, put all of these in. I hesitate because an even semi-comprehensive LaTeX suite dwarfs everything else combined, at least 2 gigs (texlive-full is 3324 MB installed).
Do we stick with CRAN versions? I'll probably include a few github installs for cases where the CRAN version carries bugs that are fixed in packages that are rather stable on github (e.g. reshape2)
[^1]: My intuition is not to necessarily build both debian and ubuntu versions for all the usecases, but just for the base images, since base images are meant to be general purpose, but each use-case image is supposed to be more targeted by demand or something like that.
A use case image that builds on the
ubuntu/rstudio
image [^1], adding the popular suite of packages from Hadley, along with the dependencies to make them most useful.Questions:
rmarkdown
&knitr
, (and hence pandoc, maybe some tex?) or is that a separate use-case?r-devel
, but the default pandoc templates use more.My intuition for now is yes, put all of these in. I hesitate because an even semi-comprehensive LaTeX suite dwarfs everything else combined, at least 2 gigs (texlive-full is 3324 MB installed).
[^1]: My intuition is not to necessarily build both debian and ubuntu versions for all the usecases, but just for the base images, since base images are meant to be general purpose, but each use-case image is supposed to be more targeted by demand or something like that.