Le 16/10/2012 12:43, Volker Braun a écrit :
Given the choice between update (drop a patch that is fixed upstream)
and fork (maintain a separate patch), I think we should always opt for
the former. Otherwise we'll just get bogged down in an ever-increasing
maintenance headache. Don't reinvent the wheel.
So I'd say we should always upgrade to new upstream stable releases.
Sometimes that uncovers bugs, which we then can report upstream.
It depends.
For example, in "debian stable", the adjective refers to the fact that
the bugs are stable, precisely because things aren't updated to latest
upstreams. The downside is that it is always using several years old
software, even when it gets out! And that makes sense...
On the other end, when you're looking for say an elliptic curve
algorithm or trying to make some things explicit in some very
specialized domain, then you are generally interested in the latest and
greatest.
Isn't sage geared toward research-level mathematics anymore?
Snark on #sagemath
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
