On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Ivan Andrus <darthand...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 26, 2012, at 7:09 PM, Benjamin Jones wrote: >> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Ivan Andrus <darthand...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> No offense taken. Who knows what's going to happen after I graduate for >>> example—maybe I'll get a full time job fixing bugs in Sage, or maybe I'll be >>> flipping burgers. :-) >>> >>> It's important to remember that if it's standard someone _has_ to maintain >>> it. Of course, it's also more likely that someone _will_ maintain it. >>> >>> -Ivan >>> >> >> From the point of view that making sage-mode a standard package would >> increase the likelihood that it is maintained, I would support it >> being included as a standard package. > > Do you say that because you feel it hasn't been maintained well, or that it > might not be in the future since the original author has moved on? > > -Ivan >
I said that in the spirit that I think sage-mode is a useful package and any steps we can take to ensure that useful packages continue to be well maintained is a good thing. I haven't been using it for all that long, so I can't comment on if it has or hasn't been maintained well in the past. As for the future, who knows, but making it a standard package will increase its chances to thrive compared to making it an optional package. What is your opinion as the current maintainer? -- Benjamin Jones -- 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
