Le 08/11/2011 17:04, Michael Orlitzky a écrit :
In any case, the "do them both" approach is fine until one is so
obviously superior that the other side can be convinced.
Just to make my position clear again ; I'm for the "do them both"
approach. And I don't call for breaking anything at once, but for slow
evolution -- by just being thoughtful!
What I'm critisizing is that there currently is a "sage is a
distribution ; if you think otherwise, you can just go in your corner
work on it" approach, which doesn't make it easy to package
sage-as-a-program, and explains why it isn't in the major distributions
already.
Let us take another example how it could be possible.
The gnome project (http://www.gnome.org) is a big bunch of open source
programs meant to work together, and released regularly as a whole. But
they are still independent, and they still can be installed/built
separately. Each can also have its own releases. And if some developper
needs to have an upper view on things ; work on several of the pieces at
once... then it's still possible, through the use of jhbuild
(http://live.gnome.org/Jhbuild). Gnome is available on all major
distributions, be they GNU or BSD based.
So it's entirely possible for sage to have both the cake and its icing :
- easy for developpers, even those who need to work on several parts of
sage at once ;
- easy for packagers, to finally finds its way in major distributions,
and from there on more devices.
Snark on #sagemath
--
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
