On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:09 PM, kcrisman <kcris...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> And I agree that we should communicate with the author politely. I was >> addressing the Sage developers that use lcalc, and I think that its >> allowable to use a more colloquial tone in that case. > > I would submit that we should be as polite as possible whenever > discussing component pieces of Sage. We depend on them to make it > work great. This is especially true when discussing something fairly > technical to a large proportion of Sage developers, I would guess, and > certainly to the many users who subscribe or visit this on the web in > the hopes of learning something. This is a public forum, even if it > often doesn't seem like it because we get to know one another to some > extent at Sage Days and on the list. > > As a separate issue, I realize that not everyone will agree on what > acronyms/cuss words are appropriate for this forum, so I won't push > this too strongly. But my guess is that the public Mma lists, or > Mapleprimes, wouldn't be too hot on this as a customer relations > strategy. > > (I also realize that now someone will prove me wrong by finding a much > worse example on one of those sites!) > > Colloquially yours, > - kcrisman
+1, to all of the above. What I was trying to say is that we should focus on getting the (very sophisticated and useful) code to compile and work again, rather than complain about the number of compiler warnings it gives. Getting it into a public repository would be a great step forward for those who care about cross-platform compatibility and compiler workings to contribute. - Robert -- 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
