>> I think there might be a bit of overconfidence in assuming that any >> one of the "top 10 Sage developers" is going to reproduce even a >> fraction of that complexity in the near term. > >That's not what is being discussed. The question is about the >technical feasibility of removing lisp/maxima from the core of Sage.
...[snip]... >The rest of your email is interesting but off topic, where I hope the >topic of this thread will stay: "technical feasibility of removing >lisp/maxima from the core of sage (they will instead be optional)". A strawman argument? Surely you can simply remove Maxima by .... simply removing it. If you don't wish to discuss the complexity of replacing the removed functionality then I don't see that this thread has any content at all. Simply remove Maxima and be done with it. I'd have thought that implicit in removing Maxima would be an effort to replace the lost functionality. That implies an evaluation of the complexity of the problem, which I was trying to give based on facts. I've clearly misunderstood. Sorry for the off topic post. Tim Daly --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
