On 2016-04-14 17:38, Erik Bray wrote:
Sage already has the problem of large
chunks of code that are effectively unmaintained and create a
maintenance burden on anyone serious about maintaining sage. Their
interfaces whither, and become inconsistent with the rest of the
package. It's dead weight.
I disagree with the above. It's not necessarily a problem to have
unmaintained-but-still-working code.
Why? I thought the goal was to deprecate sagenb?
At long as SageNB is still supposed to work (even if deprecated),
somebody has to do some minimal maintenance to keep it working.
Currently, it seems that nobody wants to do this. If SageNB would become
again part of Sage, then we can do this minimal maintenance as part of
normal Sage development.
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
