On 2015-06-21 13:57, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
And there is a huge difference in the number of developers between
the two projects which influenced their decision about the release cycle.
But the number of PARI/GP developers is something which OpenDreamKit
will influence, right? That's what I
On 2015-06-21 05:45, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade wrote:
sagemath should really, really,
rely only on released upstream releases or third party packages.
We have had this discussion many times before and such a requirement
would be a major obstacle for serious Sage development. I think it's
On 21/06/15 12:53, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2015-06-21 05:45, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade wrote:
sagemath should really, really,
rely only on released upstream releases or third party packages.
We have had this discussion many times before and such a requirement
would be a major obstacle
2015-06-21 0:21 GMT-03:00 Francois Bissey francois.bis...@canterbury.ac.nz:
There are two factors here:
1) libcsage is gone in the upcoming sage 6.8.
Ok. I would prefer it kept around as a generic place to add
wrappers, or better saying hacks :)
2) I bit the bullet and used the pari git
There are two factors here:
1) libcsage is gone in the upcoming sage 6.8.
2) I bit the bullet and used the pari git snapshot used in sage
for sage-on-gentoo.
This was not a light decision. I looked at the packages depending
of pari and I found they were in two class:
a) packages using an outdated
Hi,
I believe this should be one of the best places to ask,
about any estimative of when it will be available.
I have sagemath 6.5 packaged in Fedora. Today I started
implementing a pari_wrap.c and pari_wrap.h interface
in libcsage, but noticed it would not be a trivial patch to
create
