Thanks for pointing that out. I am somewhat disturbed by the positive review for that becoming a standard package, which seems inconsistent with previous policy. In #6663 I am merely suggesting 4ti2 and glpk as experimental packages, with the idea of transitioning them to optional, and then maybe standard eventually.
Just to be clear, I have felt that in the past the hurdle for becoming a standard package is too high. I just want the process to be consistent. -Marshall On Jul 31, 4:51 pm, Willem Jan Palenstijn <w...@usecode.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 01:18:58PM -0700, Marshall Hampton wrote: > > > I agree, that doesn't sound good. At the moment, I just want to check > > out the sandpile functionality, so I don't think I will wade in and > > try to improve glpk, or bug the author to do so. > > > On the positive side, I think I now have packages that install > > correctly, at least on my own mac. They are at: > > >http://www.d.umn.edu/~mhampton/4ti2.p0.spkg > >http://www.d.umn.edu/~mhampton/glpk.p0.spkg > > > i.e. I have overwritten my previous broken versions. > > This is also now trac ticket #6663 (http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ > > ticket/6663). > > There is also a more recent GLPK spkg > athttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6602, I believe. > > -Willem Jan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
