> > There is also a lot of code that does not use configure && make &&
> > make install. How is that dealt with? What about python packages? Or
> > do you only want to deal with optional packages?
>
> Yes, I think he definitely claims to *only* want to deal with optional
> packages.
I don't ! Once a framework exists (and is tested for stability for
optional packages, say), why not use it for non-optional ones ? At
least those that are easy to tweak ...
I only mentioned the optional ones as that would be the most visible
improvement (as it is now, you install an optional package, it breaks
something, oops, you need to do a full reinstall or remove files one
by one while praying that none of the original ones was overwritten),
so only doing it for optional ones is already worth it, but getting
rid of cruft during updates (or being able to revert an update without
rebuilding files in an environment that is not quite exactly the same
as it used to be) is an interesting byproduct.
But don't worry, I do not intend to break everything ! (Well not at
first anyway ;->)
/vincent
> It could also mean that we just don't deploy it on windows, i.e., on
> windows one doesn't have an "uninstall optional package" option.
Yep. Although the "keeping track of the package manifest" would still
help a bit there - no protection against clobbering files though.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
