... What I tried to say is that the core distribution should have minimal dependencies, but contain as much of sage as possible.
More code requires more dependencies. The "core distribution" as you describe is not possible. I don't understand this, and I don't understand why some "functionality" (as mentioned above, e.g. "simplify" and "taylor") is in sagemath-categories. I think it is problematic if we deploy a scheme that not even all developers understand. In particular, the description given by Matthias, reproduced below, makes no sense to me at all. > The other contents of *sagemath-categories* are provided in similar spirit. For example, there are the Function objects from sage.functions -- but only in a generic, dispatching role. Actual implementations of most functions depend on various libraries. Likewise, polynomials are there only in a generic implementation; the specialized implementations and higher-level functionality (e.g., Gröbner bases) are provided by other distributions as they depend on various libraries. Martin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/d1d10e21-308e-4864-a93c-ea6ddb5f43d4n%40googlegroups.com.
