On 12/17/11 2:11 AM, William Stein wrote:
On Dec 16, 2011 11:25 PM, "Jason Grout" <jason-s...@creativetrax.com <mailto:jason-s...@creativetrax.com>> wrote: > > There are about 10 new python packages that the flask notebook depends on. Some of these are very small packages. Does anyone have any objection to lumping all of these together into a sagenb-dependencies spkg? I can see no big advantage over not just putting these in the sagenb spkg. Why is it better to have two spkg's? I suspect they will both get upgraded ever time either one gets upgraded. Just curious. Obviously you are working way more on sagenb.com <http://sagenb.com> at the moment, so have a better sense of what is best. But since you are asking for objections, there was one.
I think it's cleaner to separate out the dependencies (that we don't modify) from the repository of our code. As it is, the sagenb spkg is generated directly from the repository. We'd have to modify that script to find the right tarballs (or download them if necessary), extract them into the spkg, etc. While that is doable, it just seems much simpler to maintain a separate dependency spkg. Besides, that will probably make things easier for sage-on-gentoo people; they can just fulfill the dependencies spkg on their own system and not even worry about it. In fact, they could just ignore the spkg, and when they install the sage notebook, it will automatically download the latest versions of the dependencies.
Thanks, Jason -- 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
