2018-06-07 15:06 GMT+02:00 Jeroen Demeyer <j.deme...@ugent.be>: > And I'm not saying there should be absolutely no patches, just that they >> should be the very last resort. >> > > I mostly agree with this, it's what I'm already doing. It just depends > where you put the borderline of "very last resort" and there we probably > differ. >
For example the `backports.shutil_get_terminal_size` patch: It pretty much only fixes a formatting issue in the error messages right? I don't see that as last resort. > But I don't see how this would help distributions. As long as a package > has at least 1 essential patch (even a 1-liner in the case of GLPK), > distros have to deal with it. > That assumes that there always is an essential patch already. And even if there is, two patches don't have the same cost as one. They have to both be checked, understood, documented and maybe discussed with a maintainer (who does not see sage as his primary priority). -- 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.
