Are you meaning that you still update it as an “old” spkg? Seriously I thought Nathann was only talking about producing such a spkg. And that I really think we can drop. If someone care about making new old style spoke, they can use an old sage for that.
François > On 6/01/2015, at 20:33, Simon King <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > On 2015-01-06, Francois Bissey <[email protected]> wrote: >> +1 to remove. >>> On 6/01/2015, at 20:11, Nathann Cohen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The second part of it is about our former .spkg files, how to build >>> them, the use of HG, etc... >>> >>> What would you think of removing it and only have the content of >>> "Packaging Third-party code" in this section ? I would of course check >>> that the info it contains (and that are still valid) also appear in >>> the 'new spkg' section. > > I'd vote against removing it. > > Reason: There still exist old style spkgs (I am to blame for one > optional old style spkg), and as long as that is the case, information > on their format is relevant. > > That said, if my spkg is the *only* old style spkg, then I should better > soon open a ticket to make it new style. > > Best regards, > Simon > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
