Hi Andrew and all, > Does anyone have any /concrete suggestions/ for how we could improve the > "development model"? There is definitely room for improvement but short of > paying someone I don't have any good suggestions. > The problem is that what I want implemented is often different to what > everyone else wants, but thankfully there is some overlap and so some give > and take. Ideas anyone?
I think it would be a good idea to try to integrate patches in the sage-combinat queue more quickly. This means less rebasing that is necessary, less frustration trying to commute patches etc. (this past summer we had some frustration with these issues getting a 15,000 line patch on symmetric functions into sage). Sometimes it might be possible to achieve this by writing more incremental patches, but this is not always possible. Nathann, since the ultimate aim of the patches in the sage-combinat queue is to get them into sage eventually, I do not think it is a fork. It is a "playground" for the current code, so that it is easier to share the code than everyone downloading the individual not-yet-finished patches from the trac server. Best, Anne -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
