On 2013-01-17, Volker Braun <vbraun.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > ------=_Part_173_26006841.1358428542611 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:13:02 AM UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >> Mind you, when I worked on the latest Maxima update (#13364), I had to do >> git >> bisect on *Maxima* repo to debug *Sage*, and then apply the results of >> this >> investigation to stripped of .git/ Maxima source tree, for which I did not >> have an exact mapping back to Maxima repo. >> > > The spkg-install scripts should have an option to use a plain checked-out > source tree instead of the tarball for development purposes. > Likewise, it > should be possible to build/test/install the spkg without having to tar > (sage -pkg) it up first. > > But none of that would be helped by stuffing the maxima sources (say) in > the Sage repo. For starters, how do you order the upstream commits relative > to the Sage library commits? For starters, you don't have to; you can hack on a subtree.
> Things that have to be touched simultaneously > must be in the same repo. But the maxima developers never touch the Sage > library (how could they), so there is no benefit in imposing any particular > order between our commits and their commits. In fact, just sorting in > commits by date, say, would make maxima harder to debug. Suddenly your > bisect would unroll changes in all other libraries in Sage, which would be > a huge headache. > > > > > -- 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.
