Hi Jeroen, On 2012-05-02, Jeroen Demeyer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2012-05-02 21:18, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: >> Would it be fair to say that the optional packages should be considered >> unreliable? > Indeed. That could be one of the reasons they are considered "optional".
Really?? I hope I am allowed to disagree. I thought that optional packages are supposed to work on all supported platforms and are supposed to be reliable (and peer reviewed and so on) - which is why there are *experimental* packages, that may lack reliability. And that is also why there is a component "optional packages" on trac. I thought that there are optional packages (in contrast to standard packages) since * in some cases the licence does not allow to include code as standard package, and * in some cases a package provides good stuff that, however, is only relevant to a small proportion of users. Best regards, Simon -- To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
