2011/3/9 Paulo César Pereira de Andrade <paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com>: > 2011/3/9 Harald Schilly <harald.schi...@gmail.com>: > > I understand that this kind of post, besides attempting to state it is a > friendly one, could cause more harm than good. The TV show probably > would have a small specialized audience :-) But the rants/discussions, > and ego wars (not so much as in some other projects) that happens > from time to time should be worth a watch. > >> exactly how did you come up with 280 points? > > Not "exact" values, as I just did a quick read and add to a sum, > but, considering sage base code and mandatory spks, the biggest > values I considered were: > > Building from source > - with your own build tool for this code [ +100 points of FAIL ] > (( spk-* shell scripts )) > > Bundling > - Your source only comes with other code projects that it depends on [ > +20 points of FAIL ] > - If your source code cannot be built without first building the > bundled code bits [ +10 points of FAIL ] > - If you have modified those other bundled code bits [ +40 points of FAIL ] > > Libraries > - Your source does not try to use system libraries if present [ +20 > points of FAIL ] > > But I did not account: > Releases > - Your releases are only in an encapsulation format that you invented. > [ +100 points of FAIL ] > (( spkgs ))
I'm glad I didn't read and believe that webpage in 2004, or there would be no Sage. -- William -- 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
