On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:01:00 Jason Grout wrote: > On 1/16/12 4:53 PM, François Bissey wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:36:50 jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: > >> Hi everyone, > >> > >> We don't apply any customizations to twisted anymore; we just install > >> it > >> straight as a python package. I think it would be easier to just > >> include it in the sagenb spkg as a dependency (like flask, etc.). > >> That > >> would mean that we automatically get the latest twisted every time the > >> sagenb spkg is updated, instead of having to maintain a separate > >> twisted > >> spkg. Does anyone have any objections to removing the twisted spkg > >> and > >> including twisted into the sagenb spkg? > >> > >> Please vote: > >> > >> [ ] Yes, remove the twisted spkg and include twisted in the sagenb > >> spkg > >> as a dependency > >> > >> [ ] No, keep the twisted spkg as a separate spkg > > > > I generally not in favor of spkg inside other spkg. On the other hands > > sagenb is pretty much independent of the rest of sage and twisted is > > only used in the notebook as far as I know. > > twisted won't be a full spkg inside of an spkg. Already, the sagenb > spkg includes a number of dependencies, and twisted would just be added > to those (like flask, various flask extensions, pytz, etc.) > > It would be trivial to make a "bare" sagenb spkg that doesn't include > any dependencies, but relies on them being installed already (or > downloads them from the internet on-the-fly). > > > So: > > If twisted is only used by the notebook include it in sagenb, make its > > maintenance the sole responsibility of sagenb. Otherwise keep it > > separate. > Yes, this would be mean that twisted is the sole responsibility of the > sagenb project. > > > Mind you that including twisted in sagenb will hurt in sage-on-gentoo > > because if we use the spkg to distribute it we will waste bandwith > > since we use twisted provided by the system. > > Would the above "bare" spkg help you? At one point, we also had two > spkgs---sagenb and sagenb-dependencies. Would you vote returning to > that two-spkg model? > That would actually be very nice for us! I would vote for the two spkg model.
Francois -- 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
