On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 5:12:28 PM UTC+1, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> I don't think that the question where to cut is meaningful in a first 
> time. Cutting more should not be a problem. 
>
> I would make an important distinction between: 
>
>   1 - Core fonctionality that we may package in some way to be useful to 
> others. I think Cython, cysignals are meaningful examples. Though, these 
> two examples are developed outside of Sage. 
>
>   2 - Optional functionality that may be useful to Sage users. 
>
> This is basically the distinction we currently have between a "Sage 
> core" (still made of packages) and "Sage optional packages". Of course 
> there could be much more that currently in both categories. 
>

IMHO you are  underestimate how well-connected Sage lib is.
 

>
> Examples of possible cutting of type 1 (Sage core): 
>
>   - a lot in sage/libs (e.g. pari and the work of Jeroen to update 
> cypari [1], the gsl interface, interface to LP solvers, ...) 
>

LP solvers are used by graphs, coding theory, what else?

 

>   - fast_callable as Erik mentioned 
>
> perhaps.
 

> Examples of possible cutting of type 2 (things that needs Sage core): 
>
>   - graphs 
>   - a large part of combinat  
>

graphs are used by combinat (posets!), and graphs use combinat.
Posets are used by polyhedral code, which is also used by combinat, 
and by various toric varieties stuff...

  - games 
>   - modular groups 
>   - elliptic curves 
>
perhaps.
 

>
> I think that the development framework should not necessarily be the 
> same for both. I feel like we should keep "Sage core" as centralized as 
> possible concerning its development. Even though, each release of Sage 
> might also be a release of other subpackages. 
>
> Concerning the extras, I think that it should not be a problem to make 
> it very open. On one hand, some of them could still be centralized in 
> development with Sage core. But anybody should be able to have its own 
> package on its webpage as it already exists. 
>
> Hence for me we lack in order: 
>
>     * a model that allows centralized development but modularized 
> distribution 
>
>     * a patchbot that tests core and optional packages as well as their 
> interactions 
>
>     * a nice howto (as already started by Chris) 
>
>     * having a centralized way of testing for presence of extra packages 
> (a good step would be [#20382]) 
>
> Starting cutting is just about people time and interest... 
>
> Cheers 
> Vincent 
>
>   [1] https://github.com/jdemeyer/cypari 
>   [#20382] http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20382 
>

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to