On May 18, 9:50 am, Ondrej Certik <ond...@certik.cz> wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Brian Granger <ellisonbg....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
<SNIP>
> > But, if in the medium term (as Michael is hoping for), the Sage build
> > system can be improved to the point where both Sage and SPD are using
> > the same infrastructure, that would help a lot. We could then create
> > SPD releases with whatever spkgs that we need without burdening the
> > Sage devs.
>
> Sounds good.
>
> As to me, I don't mind calling SPD just Sage. I chose a different name
> because we were asked explicitly by Michael not to call it Sage. I
> guess it's like Ubuntu, it's also not called a Debian, when in fact it
> *is* a Debian.
Well, I see the relationship between Sage and SPD more as Ubuntu vs. a
respin. Kubuntu focuses on KDE vs. the more gnome centric Ubuntu.
Analog there is Edubuntu and so on.
In the end we should have Sage-core, i.e. the standard configuration
of Sage, but there is no reason to not have sage-fe with a say loads
of spkgs on top of Sage that aren't in there due to size restriction.
SPD would be the very core infrastructure that can be branded, i.e.
doing notebook+sympy+numpy+scipy+MPL+mavavi+atlas could be something
that is not a subset of sage-core, but has substantial overlap.
> For Kevin: the aim of SPD is to make it easy to create all in one
> packages with just the stuff that we need (e.g. packages that are
> currently in SPD, like scipy, numpy, notebook and then bunch of custom
> libraries, that don't even have a spkg yet). And be compatible with
> Sage. That's it.
>
> Ondrej
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
