On Sunday, September 4, 2011, Maarten Derickx <m.derickx.stud...@gmail.com> wrote: > Nice post. Altough it's really written from a commercial point of view, so not everything is directly applicable to sage.
Also, we very rarely (never?) make significant changes directly to upstream code - just tiny bigfixes on occasion. It seems like the article is about making major changes. I wondered about the *language* they are using? Why do they have to change upstream so much to get the job done? William > 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? > > -- > 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 < sage-devel%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org > -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- 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
