On Apr 24, 5:20 pm, mabshoff <mabsh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Apr 24, 2:12 pm, Ben Goodrich <goodrich....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Apr 24, 2:27 pm, Tim Abbott <tabb...@mit.edu> wrote: > > <SNIP> > > Hi Ben, > > > On the issue of using pre-release versions of Sage dependencies, > > perhaps as a last resort we could ask Debian package maintainers to > > upload a SVN version to the experimental repository and a reasonably > > up-to-date version of Sage could be put into experimental while an > > older version of Sage goes into unstable and later testing whenever it > > is possible to sync a Sage release to officially versions of its > > dependencies? And people could get Sage from experimental if they need > > it. This would also make it possible for Ubuntu and other distros that > > cherry-pick from experimental to include Sage in their regular > > releases. The major issue that I can see is that maybe experimental > > contains a pre-release of gcc or something than an individual does not > > want but does want Sage from experimental. Perhaps that can be > > addressed with tight enough versioning of Sage's dependencies, even > > though Debian sort of frowns on that. > > Sure. > > In general anything in Debian stable one day will be woefully out of > date by the time the freeze in Debian is over. I think the only viable > option to use Sage in Debian is to use it from experimental/testing > since any support request for say a year old version of Sage will > likely start with the question "Can someone reproduce this in the > current release". Any patch from our end will only go in the next > release unless we decide one day to do support some stable release for > a while (and I am honestly not seeing that happening for a while). So > having Ubuntu package Sage like in 9.04 and having that distro live > for a year (assuming they had packaged something current) seems to be > reasonable for the casual user who does not want to live on the > bleeding edge of Sage. > > > Ben > > Cheers, > > Michael
Right, anyone (mostly servers) using Debian stable or oldstable is not going to be able to keep up with Sage easily. But what I think Tim is saying is that he can't easily get a recent version of Sage into unstable (and subsequently testing) because unstable and especially testing usually have official releases of things Sage depends on. So, I was just suggesting that we could perhaps convince Debian maintainers of Sage dependencies to put pre-release versions into experimental, in addition to the official versions they maintain for unstable / testing. This would be annoying for them but maybe they would do it if we asked nicely. Then, Tim can get Sage 4.x into experimental when it is convenient for him, while Sage 3.0.x stays in unstable and testing until there is a window to sync some relatively recent version of Sage with 100% officially released dependencies. Experimental, more so than unstable, does tend to have pre-releases of packages. Ben --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
