On Sunday, September 4, 2011, Maarten Derickx m.derickx.stud...@gmail.com
wrote:
Nice post. Altough it's really written from a commercial point of view, so
not everything is directly applicable to sage.
Also, we very rarely (never?) make significant changes directly to upstream
code - just tiny bigfixes on occasion. It seems like the article is about
making major changes. I wondered about the *language* they are using? Why
do they have to change upstream so much to get the job done?
William
Also I clearly feel how much work it takes to get, a small fix merged
upstream is very dependent on the particular upstream in question. In his
article he sais it's such a big amount effort that it's basically not worth
it. But my experience is that small fixes are most of the time not that hard
to get merged upstream.
The article also made me wonder for wich sage packages we don't have sage
developers wich are also developers upstream.
I'm also curious for wich project sage is considered upstream, of course
there is psage but are there any others?
--
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
sage-devel%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
--
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--
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
