Hi,
Le 26/09/2014 22:22, Simon King a écrit :
Hi Julien,
On 2014-09-26, Julien Puydt <[email protected]> wrote:
I don't think it's good to patch upstream and ship it as if it were
upstream.
At least in the spkgs I am aware of, Sage does *not* ship a patched
version of upstream. Instead, it ships the unmodified upstream sources
and ships patches, which are applied to the upstream sources while the
spkg is built.
Yes, if you look at the sources, there is a clear separation ; but when
you use sage's version, you sometimes use a quite heavily patched upstream.
My point is that it's pretty bad for at least two reasons :
- for a long-term support perspective, that means more work following
upstream ;
- for a public relationship perspective with respect to upstream,
modifying things in their back (or worse, still proceed after asking and
getting a "no"), possibly leading to them getting direct bug reports
which don't apply to their similarly-numbered version... doesn't
precisely build the kind of trust and respect one would expect from
civilized cooperating people.
I have to say the situation used to be worse than what it is now, but
that's not a reason to get back to frivolous patching.
JP
--
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
