I agree. The situation is far from uniform, and while parts of sage are quite mature, others need enough work that supporting long-term compatibility seems counterproductive.
One thing that helps is having python as a model for core functionality, for example lists. Your stories of Maple incompatibilities are unlikely with sage since they are unlikely with python. The current policy of 1 year + major release seems reasonable to me in practice. It might make sense to lengthen that in a few years though. -Marshall On Nov 3, 3:02 am, Florent Hivert <florent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr> wrote: > By the way, though some part of sage are already very polished, I personally > think sage has being still in a beta stage. Lots of things are far from being > stable and moreover, it is very incoherent in its design from one part to the > other. Furthermore, the quality of the doc is very variable. I don't intend > any offense but I think this as a fact. We all do that on our spare time and > we all are inclined to do what we like. > > As a consequence, pretending to be stable to early is very dangerous. I think > its a very good way to scare newcomers away. So I think we should keep our > extremely good work and not spend too much time pretending it is better than > it really is. I hope I'm won't offend anyone; I also hope that I'm not > starting a flamewar... > > Cheers, > > Florent --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
