On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:36:25 PM UTC+2, E. Madison Bray wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:06 PM Erik Bray wrote: > > > > We still have quite a bit of code around for supporting old-style > > packages in .spkg archives, though it is not well tested anymore and > > I'm not even 100% sure installing these still works. > > > > We have also noted, since Sage 6.9, that these are deprecated and > unsupported. > > > > That seems like long enough to me to rip out all support for them. > > I'd especially like to do this since I feel increasingly compelled to > > rewrite most or all of the sage-spkg script in Python, and it will > > greatly simplify matters to not have to maintain that support. > > > > But even that aside, it seems well past time? > > The original discussion got a little off-topic. With the exception of > maybe one or two packages for which there is a desire to convert to > new-style packages--which can certainly be done--is there any > objection to dropping support for old-style packages, both from the > code and the documentation? >
With apologies for resurrecting an old thread, just wanted to note that I added a note in the ticket about this polytopes_db_4d about the possibility of making it accessible as an online database: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26029#comment:9 Would anyone have interest in this (not necessarily just working on the problem, but actually having access to such a database?) Or would it not make much sense to? -- 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.
