On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 10:59:52 PM UTC+1, Volker Braun wrote: > > Is there really going to be much activity on SageNB in the future? I > appreciate that you fixed the packaging and dependency nightmare, but it > seems that we are now (i.e. after #14840) at the point where we are likely > to just wait and eventually remove SageNB. I always found it frustrating to > do any kind of change on SageNB; there isn't really a good testsuite so you > basically have to check by hand that you don't break stuff. And none of the > core developers use SageNB so we don't really spot breakage that well > either. More than anything else, we can maintain Sage easily because we > have a pretty awesome testsuite. > > Having to do two separate commits, one to Sage and one to SageNB, isn't > really that much of a deal in comparison. Of course then waiting > indefinitely for a new SageNB release *IS* a big problem. So as a minimal > proposal, how about we just take over the SageNB github repo and make > releases whenever we need them. Which really isn't all that often. > > Sounds quite meaningful to me. What I dislike about #14840 is that it creates 14 new standard packages (not needed for anything except sagenb), instead of just running 'sage --pip'. We already install stuff by 'sage --pip', e.g. the ssl support needed for sagenb and jupyter; and because we cannot make this support into packages (because we must, just must distribute tarballs...) it creates all sorts of errors and confusion. Becoming less prudish about source tarballs would only benefit users and simplify source code...
-- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
