On 2024-04-20 15:33:51, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > Michael, I think you may be using too much jargon to get your point across > to the general readership of this list. > > Let's maybe use this opportunity to make this as concrete as possible and > explain it in the most plain terms. > What entanglement are you concerned about?
For example, we have several tickets that are disputed because they will use ./bootstrap and data from the sage distribution (build/pkgs) to generate the pyproject.toml files for the modular components. This ensures that the components cannot truly be separated, not only from the other components, but from the mini-distro in build/pkgs that a large chunk of us hate. Contrast with some other parts of sage that have been modularized: * pplpy * memory-allocator * cypari * cysignals * primecountpy These have been successfully disentangled from both the sage library and the sage distribution and I don't think anyone has complaints about them. They've been moved to separate repositories which, while not strictly necessary, is certainly proof that they are in fact disentangled. We can typically depend on stable versions of them and install/test them independently. They do not depend on nonstandard or bleeding-edge features of the python ecosystem. -- 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/ZiWKZlNHnBxOvBXm%40stitch.
