> Let me sketch my strategy to get closer to the design of other 
> distributions. https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29865 (waiting for 
> review) introduces the two lowest levels - *sagemath-objects*, 
> *sagemath-categories.* As soon as we have namespace packages working, the 
> latter will depend on the former. The current issue with both of these 
> distributions is that they are not really separately testable because the 
> doctests for these modules depend on a lot of other functionality from 
> higher-level parts of the library. In contrast, in 
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32432, we are working on a medium-sized 
> distribution *sagemath-polyhedra*, which be the first modularized 
> distribution that is useful for end users. It will also be sufficiently 
> self-contained for running most doctests (but some doctests that depend on 
> other parts of the library are marked # optional). Between 
> *sagemath-categories 
> *and *sagemath-polyhedra *(which depends on *sagemath-categories*) there 
> is room for designing intermediate distributions. For example, there could 
> be a distribution that contains the linear algebra needed by 
> *sagemath-polyhedra* (i.e., parts of the sage.modules and sage.matrix).
>
> At the coarsest level, *sagemath-symbolics (*
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/31695) and *sagemath-standard-no-symbolics 
> *(https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32601) are intended to form a 
> partition of all Sage standard library modules that are not already in 
> *sagemath-categories 
> *(or its dependencies). Below these two distributions, again there is 
> room for designing various intermediate distributions. The design will be 
> best if done by (or in ollaboration with) developers who are knowledgable 
> about specific parts of the Sage library corresponding to the various areas 
> of mathematics.
>

Thank you. This would be a start. 

For example, if there would be a distribution sagemath-coding that contains 
sage/coding, then would we have this hierarchy 

sagemath-objects < sagemath-categories < sagemath-standard-no-symbolics < 
... < sagemath-coding
 
where ... might be filled with other intermediate distributions like, I 
imagine, sagemath-rings, sagemath-schemes? In general, would this hierarchy 
have a tree structure?

-- 
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/079c0635-7611-42a3-a230-d6f258f4145en%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to