On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 03:09:31 Maarten Derickx wrote: > Nice post. Altough it's really written from a commercial point of view, so > not everything is directly applicable to sage. > > Also I clearly feel how much work it takes to get, "a small fix" merged > upstream is very dependent on the particular upstream in question. In his > article he sais it's such a big amount effort that it's basically not worth > it. But my experience is that small fixes are most of the time not that hard > to get merged upstream. > > The article also made me wonder for wich sage packages we don't have sage > developers wich are also developers upstream. > > I'm also curious for wich project sage is considered upstream, of course > there is psage but are there any others? Well I consider sage to be upstream for sage-on-gentoo. The position of psage is more ambigous I think. My understanding is that psage is a lab for William to conduct experiments. So in some way it is downstream and some other it may be upstream.
Historically small fixes haven't been too hard to get fixed in sage. But it depends on the part of sage and sometimes of the release manager. I am very involved in sage nowadays so a lot of applicable sage-on-gentoo stuff gets in. Francois This email may be confidential and subject to legal privilege, it may not reflect the views of the University of Canterbury, and it is not guaranteed to be virus free. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message and any attachments. Please refer to http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/emaildisclaimer for more information. -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
