I think the solution for that would be to have all checks run before the
actual build of any package.
That is:
1) the package manager figures out which packages should be installed, and
in which (partial) order.
2) If any of them needs a user confirmation, ask for it
3) after the user has
On 2015-08-18 10:51, Nathann Cohen wrote:
Since I maintain an optional package that depends on another optional
package that must not be automatically installed because of licence:
Will the automatic installation of dependencies be involve asking the
user if the licence of the dependency is not
Apart from not spewing the entire log to stdout (can anybody read that
fast?), we should re-print the prompt on keyboard input thats not y or n
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 4:31:48 PM UTC-4, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2015-08-18 10:51, Nathann Cohen wrote:
Since I maintain an optional
Since I maintain an optional package that depends on another optional
package that must not be automatically installed because of licence:
Will the automatic installation of dependencies be involve asking the
user if the licence of the dependency is not GPL compatible?
Whatever happens, the
On 2015-08-18 14:49, Volker Braun wrote:
Whats the use case of attempting to install a package without
dependencies?
An obvious use-case is that you're switching branches/Sage versions and
you just want to try to compile a single package and you don't want to
be bothered by dependencies. I
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 9:26:44 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
An obvious use-case is that you're switching branches/Sage versions and
you just want to try to compile a single package and you don't want to
be bothered by dependencies.
I'd call that working around bugs in our broken
On 2015-08-18 10:21, Simon King wrote:
Hi,
On 2015-08-17 19:00, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
(A) change sage -i PKG to also install dependencies (adding some
option --no-dependencies to keep the old behaviour)
Since I maintain an optional package that depends on another optional
package that must
On 2015-08-18 20:42, Volker Braun wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 9:26:44 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
An obvious use-case is that you're switching branches/Sage versions and
you just want to try to compile a single package and you don't want to
be bothered by dependencies.
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 10:22:33 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
I'd call that working around bugs in our broken build system.
No, it's called not wanting to wait for hours until all dependencies
are compiled.
There is no need to wait for the dependencies to compile, its the job of
Hi,
On 2015-08-17 19:00, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
(A) change sage -i PKG to also install dependencies (adding some
option --no-dependencies to keep the old behaviour)
Since I maintain an optional package that depends on another optional
package that must not be automatically installed because of
An obvious use-case is that you're switching branches/Sage versions
and
you just want to try to compile a single package and you don't want
to
be bothered by dependencies.
I'd call that working around bugs in our broken build system.
No, it's called not
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 6:49:47 AM UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote:
Whats the use case of attempting to install a package without
dependencies? I can't think of any.
I'm not sure I can come up with very compelling examples, but if I've
modified some package on which gcc depends, but I
Whats the use case of attempting to install a package without dependencies?
I can't think of any. Whether you are developer or user, you always want to
have your dependencies in place before compiling something. The fact that
sage -i does not is 100% historical limitation. Now we can build
What would you like?
As your ticket aims at making users install packages in a way that takes
dependencies into account, I vote for (A) which does not change the command
that they are used to type to install packages.
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
14 matches
Mail list logo
