Dear Marteen,
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 03:17:38PM -0700, Maarten Derickx wrote:
>On Tuesday, September 6, 2011 4:47:22 PM UTC+2, Nicolas M. ThiA(c)ry
>wrote:
>
> Actually that post highlights quite well our motivations for switching
> development model from a library on t
On Tuesday, September 6, 2011 4:47:22 PM UTC+2, Nicolas M. Thiéry wrote:
>
> Actually that post highlights quite well our motivations for switching
> development model from a library on top of a system (as was
> MuPAD-Combinat w.r.t. MuPAD) to a bunch of patches, most of whom are
> intended to be
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 03:09:31AM -0700, Maarten Derickx wrote:
>I'm also curious for wich project sage is considered upstream, of course
>there is psage but are there any others?
Sage-Combinat?
Actually that post highlights quite well our motivations for switching
development model from
> On Mon, 2011-09-05 at 07:32 +0200, Julien Puydt wrote:
> Python is up to version 3.2.2 which is incompatible with 2.7.
> Plus, there is no standard for the language. It is clear that
> Sage is losing ground on the upstream development path. What
> happens when the python-based spkgs, such as SciP
On Monday, September 5, 2011 8:29:46 AM UTC+2, TimDaly wrote:
>
> I see Sage efforts to keep up with OS changes (e.g. Lion) and
> package changes (e.g. Maxima) but I am unaware of any work
> to keep up with Python.
>
There are plans to move to python 3.x somewhere in the future (at least I
heard
On Mon, 2011-09-05 at 07:32 +0200, Julien Puydt wrote:
> Le 05/09/2011 02:41, leif a écrit :
> > One shouldn't upgrade packages just for the sake of higher version
> > numbers in Sage though, and there are packages where upgrading is
> > indeed non-trivial, because of functional changes in upstream
Le 05/09/2011 02:41, leif a écrit :
One shouldn't upgrade packages just for the sake of higher version
numbers in Sage though, and there are packages where upgrading is
indeed non-trivial, because of functional changes in upstream, or a
lot of changes made by Sage to its current version.
I can'
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 03:09:31 Maarten Derickx wrote:
> Nice post. Altough it's really written from a commercial point of view, so
> not everything is directly applicable to sage.
>
> Also I clearly feel how much work it takes to get, "a small fix" merged
> upstream is very dependent on the particul
