Hi,
> I can't help feeling these fixes would be much easier to integrate if > the code was not supplied as lots of .spkg files, but just as simple > source files. I know for me personally, I would have got a lot more > done in a lot less time, if it was just a matter of editing a source > file and changing a couple of bytes in it. Not only that, but if > someone downloads only changes between versions, it would dramatically > reduce the amount of code that needs to be downloaded. The fact any > change occurs in the compressed .spkg file means the whole thing needs > to be downloaded. Exactly - the way something like Fink works would be a lot more manageable I would think (that is, one .info file with build instructions and dependency information, a .patch file against the upstream sources, and a link to said upstream sources). I understand that the goal is not to reinvent the wheel, but that particular wheel has already been invented ;-) Besides, to keep in line with the current way, it would be perfectly possible to get rid of .info files and move from .spkg files to .tar.(gz|bz2) upstream files plus .patch files that add the spkg-install script to the source tree. (Which I am assuming is more or less what .spkg maintainers are already doing anyway ...) /v -- Vincent Beffara UMPA - ENS-Lyon 46 allée d'Italie 69364 Lyon Cedex 07 Tél : 04 72 72 85 25 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
