Harald Schilly wrote:
On Mar 11, 1:05 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" <[email protected]>
wrote:
My particular issue is whether an optional package needs to build on all
supported operating systems, ...
Do all optional packages build on Solaris/t2?
I'm not sure - I know most do.
I don't think it would
be good to move all optional packages to experimental just because of
that.
I was not proposing that. I admit what I wrote as a bit confusing, but I did
write at one point "should new optional packages work on Solaris 10 (SPARC)
unless there is good reason for them not to ...".
I would prefer a matrix in the wiki that explains where each
package builds and if there are problems. Then one can decide if an
optional package is ok to use. The standard packages have to build
everywhere, that's clear, and the experimental ones probably build
nowhere ;)
Well, that does not appear to be so. See my other comment about 'bison' - that
is listed in 'experimental' despite the fact it says "Building it causes nobody
any trouble."
http://www.sagemath.org/packages/experimental/
Besides that I think the experimental vs. optional distinction is just
a matter of how well it works
But who decides "how well it works"?
It would be nice if there was clearly defined criteria a package had to meet to
be 'optional'.
and if there is somebody "assigned" to
the package; or if it is used in the sage library marked as optional
in the doctest ...
H
--
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
