วันจันทร์ที่ 10 กรกฎาคม พ.ศ. 2560

[sage-devel] Re: Old-style packages

Hi Jeroen,

On 2017-07-10, Jeroen Demeyer <jdemeyer@cage.ugent.be> wrote:
> I don't think that it should be so strict. Of course, the optional
> module should still be within the scope of Sage and be sufficiently
> related to things that Sage does.

That would indeed be the case.

> Keep in mind that there are advantages to having your code *not* in
> Sage, namely:
>
> (1) it might be usable by people who don't have Sage

Doesn't apply to my code, IMHO.

> (2) you can develop it as you wish, no need to go through the Sage Trac

I believe peer review is a good thing. So, going through Sage Trac is
an advantage.

>> That's not necessarily bad. If the documentation of optional stuff is built
>> by default
>
> It's the opposite. There is no documentation for optional packages.
> There are technical reasons for this, I have not really tried to make it
> work.

OK, it would be nice to be able to build it.

Cheers,
Simon

--
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+unsubscribe@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.

ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:

แสดงความคิดเห็น