My objections (and not only my) to this still stand - and, frankly, I
don't see anything new here. What's the point of bringing the stalled
matters up again in this original unchanged way ?
We don't need to have all the dependencies of packages like pytest in
Sage, it's just pure bloat, give their peripheral role in particular.
That is, it's fine to declare them standard, and keep them pip
packages - what do we lose this way? Nothing, and we don't bloat Sage
with even more packages nobody knows anything about - besides them
being dependencies of something in Sage.
But there is more trouble ahead if the currect proposal gets in over
my objections. Say, the next version of pytest might get a part which
needs Rust, and pytest is a wheel package, with all its buildable from
source dependencies in Sage, and Sage is fully committed to using
pytest for testing.
Are you going to include a Rust toolchain in Sage ? No, obviously not.
Are you going to demote pytest back to optional,
and throw away work done on using pytest more? No. Have another fight
over the ways Sage should be packaged? Yes, sure.
I think the only feasible way forward here is as I proposed (standard
pip packages), and I propose it again.
Dima
>
>
> I ask everyone to focus on the specifics of this proposal.
>
> --
> 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+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/2c42bd41-24a3-467e-857f-aedc3966c107n%40googlegroups.com.