On 5 Sep., 07:32, Julien Puydt <julien.pu...@laposte.net> wrote: > Le 05/09/2011 02:41, leif a crit : > > > One shouldn't upgrade packages just for the sake of higher version > > numbers in Sage though, and there are packages where upgrading is > > indeed non-trivial, because of functional changes in upstream, or a > > lot of changes made by Sage to its current version. > > I can't help but notice that last part of the sentence is part of Dave > Neary's point.
:-) That wasn't unintential. (Meaning it isn't all perfect in Sage, or we partially do have such problems.) There are changes we make that are specific to Sage, i.e. won't have any chance to get into upstream. But there are also patches to work around deficiencies (at least in Sage's "current" versions) that are either fixed (not necessarily in the same way) in newer upstream versions, or could be reported or submitted upstream. And some fixes submitted upstream didn't get merged, also sometimes because upstream chose to solve things in an inappropriate or insufficient way. -leif -- 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
