Dima: > If we concentrated on facilitating the latter, rather than on > distribution packages, it could have been there now. >
+1 Nils: > I have yet to see a convincing example where chopping up core architecture of sagemath (like the coercion framework, the category framework, etc) leads to usable bits for other projects (that get used!) It would be interesting to see something like that, particularly to evaluate what direction modularization should take. Licensing is a critical part of evaluating this. For example, mpmath is BSD licensed. Even if chopping up the core of Sage produced things that are useful, a lot of projects wouldn't touch them due to the GPLv3 license. (Networkx used to be GPL licensed and they somehow managed to relicense as BSD.) Michael Orlitzky dismissed my comments about licensing in this thread, and I really wish he were correct. William -- William (http://wstein.org) -- 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/CACLE5GDB9Yz%3DhUnOG5rVNWStWK-CyyTTW4iDTx2mF%2BL_QNW8fA%40mail.gmail.com.
