I have been thinking about this too. My personal conclusion was that the
"type" enumeration (standard, optional, experimental, pip, script) is
simply too restricted and that we need additional metadata with more
degrees of freedom.
Currently, the "type" field is relevant for:
- which packages are installed by default
- which packages should be packed in the source tarball
- which --optional tags are given when doctesting
- whether a warning message is given when installing the package
- the Make rules of a package
- the automatic dependencies of a package
I think that's bordering on being too much already. So +1 to more
metadata but -1 to inventing yet another type.
--
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.
