On May 18, 9:08 am, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Brian Granger <ellisonbg....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > From a development perspective, it makes no sense to have two separate
> > projects (Sage/SPD). In working on SPD, I have already run into small
> > bugs in Sage's infrastructure. Currently, we have to fix such things
> > in both SPD and Sage and manage the respective tickets/patches for
> > both projects. That is pretty painful for things that are simple to
> > fix.
Yep, I know you need a trac account and I haven't gotten around to it.
I discussed the patches with Ondrej yesterday in IRC and I would
prefer if you posted them here since last time Ondrej found bugs in
Sage's scripts it turned out mostly to be bugs in the way Ondrej used
them.
> >>> What I meant is that it can't be easily included by default. Or do you
> >>> want to ship Sage with all those extra dependencies?
>
> >> It's possible that there could be a *version* of Sage with them, if
> >> they all worked well. There's no technical reason why one couldn't do
> >> that at all. It's completely a matter of willpower and effort.
>
> > From the organization side of things is the "multiple versions of
> > Sage" option something you and the other Sage devs would support?
>
> Not right now. I'm sure Michael Abshoff would agree that we are way
> too busy just dealing with Sage itself.
Well, it would solve a number of long standing issues I have been
thinking about. And I think this is entirely doable before the end of
the summer.
> However, note that there are two versions *right now* -- Sage and SPD
> -- and that this is not in any way increasing my workload or
> Michael's. It's for this reason that I'm not sure I fully agree with
> your statement above that "From a development perspective, it makes no
> sense to have two separate projects (Sage/SPD)."
>
> William
I think that hopefully by the end of the summer Sage will be a rather
special and important case of SPD and that for all practical purposes
SPD's infrastructure bits have been merged back into Sage. So far I
have not seen a single patch which couldn't be handled.
Having everything under one roof just makes sense and I think once the
notebook has been spun off via Mike's code that hasn't been published
yet and when the pexpect problem on Windows has been solved it makes a
whole lot of sense to have all of SPD inside Sage since then Ondrej &
Brian can have the Sage notebook + sympy + numpy + scipy on Windows
and all other platforms.
There is a lot of work I have done in the direction of Sage native on
Windows that isn't visible yet, but the next couple weeks will see all
that work merged into 4.0.x.
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
