On Jun 12, 2009, at 8:01 AM, gsw wrote: > On 12 Jun., 00:31, Craig Citro <craigci...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Could we make the intel/powerpc split more obvious, or add >>> instructions, or make just one directory with both? >> >> I vote a big +1 on one directory with both -- I think that'd be >> way easier. >> >> -cc > > Well, my proposal would be to have one subdirectory for the OS X 10.4 > versions (both Intel and PowerPC), one subdirectory for the OS X 10.5 > versions (again both Intel and PowerPC), and from September or so on, > one directory for the OS X 10.6 version (Intel only --- Apple might > not release this for PowerPC, IIRC).
I would rather have one big directory, five or six items is not enough to bother having a deeper hierarchy in my book. > But the main problem remains nevertheless: up to now, there is no > consistent naming scheme. [...] > But till then, IMHO we first should agree on a consistent naming > scheme (and means to automate its usage, and really use it, ...), > before changing the directory structure that the users currently are > acquainted to. +1 to at least a primitive automated naming scheme. Whenever I make a bdist, I'm not sure what to call it because of the inconsistency that already exists. - Robert --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
