On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Ondrej Certik<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 8:14 AM, David Joyner<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Ondrej Certik<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >> ... >> >>>>> >>>>> On the other hand, the fact that the new format would deviate from the >>>>> sage >>>>> format would be a clear drawback. Maybe, we should have this >>>>> discussion >>>>> rather on the sage email list... >>>> >>>> Let's discuss this on the mailinglist from now on. >>> >>> I would be interested in feedback of Sage developers in the above proposal. >> >> >> My 2 cents: I'm confused what the proposal is exactly. Also, I'm concerned >> that >> the thread will be hard to follow for some on sage-devel who are not on >> spd-dev. Maybe a separate thread on sage-devel with your question might >> be clearer? > > That's right, Kilian, do you think you could please start such a thread? >
My quick thoughts are that: (1) the proposal isn't sufficiently clear, and (2) there are a lot of Sage spkg's already, and trying to change everything is a great deal of error-prone work, unless it is automated, and (3) does the proposal do anything that the existing SPKG.txt files don't do already? William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
