Hi Jeroen, On 2015-09-09, Jeroen Demeyer <jdeme...@cage.ugent.be> wrote: > The question is: to what extent should we continue supporting old-style > packages? > > (A) sage -i OLDSTYLEPKGNAME should just install the package, there is no > difference with new-style packages from the user's point of view. > (B) sage -i OLDSTYLEPKGNAME should still work but with a clear > deprecation warning. > (C) sage -i OLDSTYLEPKGNAME should still work but only after a "are you > sure?" confirmation, like we have for experimental packages. > (D) sage -i OLDSTYLEPKGNAME should give an error. > > In Sage 6.8 we have (A) and in the latest betas, we have (D). I think > that (D) is an over-reaction to the problem that some old-style packages > are confusing or broken. > > My personal vote goes to (B) since it still allows non-interactive > scripts to work like before but it shows a clear message that packages > should migrate to new-style packages. This is also implemented in #19158.
+1. (A) is fine, too (but I am biased since I am author of an old-style spkg), (C) is fine as well (but, as you said, is a problem for scripts). And (D) means breaking things on purpose without a long deprecation period. That's not acceptable. So, I prefer (B). Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
