On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:13:09AM -0700, kcrisman wrote:
> A standard package which is only useful in the presence of an optional
> package doesn't make sense to me.
It simplifies our users's life, and that is useful! Also it simplifies
*my* life: I am tired, e.g. during Sage Days, of having to explain
about Sage packages to our complete beginners for something that is
often one of the very first feature that they want to play with.
There is plenty of code in the Sage library that only works in the
presence of optional packages. But we ship it standard. Or shall we
extract, e.g. the interface to Maple/Magma/... as optional packages? :-)
A partial answer for Dima: for the notebook spkg to be useful, you
need either a local browser or you want to be running it securely,
which requires the optional pyopenssl spkg. So there already exists a
standard spkg that depends on an optional spkg or an optional system
package.
> And I fail to see why installing both graphviz and dot2tex is
> more difficult than just installing dot2tex (either as optional
> Sage package or system-wide).
(I assume you meant graphviz in this last sentence)
An answer is that graphviz is often already installed on the system.
In which case nothing needs to be done.
Cheers,
Nicolas
PS: one technical question: can a pure python spkg be installed
without any development tools (e.g. without having X-code installed on
MacOS X)?
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
