[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: Guessing package, was: Re: your program / pape

From: Alfredo Portes
Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: Guessing package, was: Re: your program / paper
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:15:48 -0400

wh-sandbox has implemented a radically different algebra build
process that avoids many of the problems associated with the
old "bootstrap" method. It has also implemented some significant
improvements to the way the Axiom database is built. Therefore
it is not clear to me if it would be possible to incorporate
Martin's package in the old Silver release without first
incorporating most (if not all) of the changes in wh-sandbox.
Silver is essentially just the old patch-50 from the tla
archives. You will recall the problems that we had last summer
trying to get Martin's code built on that system.

Arghh... do not remind me :-).  I spent 3 days without been able to
create a live cd for Martin. But as I recall patch-50 broke something,
because Martin was able to add his package using patch-49.

One could proceed by backporting all (or most) of the revisions
from the build-improvements branch and the wh-sandbox sub-
branch, but that would certainly be a lot of work! I think the
state of the current /silver branch (almost the same as /trunk)
on SourceForge is too distant from both build-improvements and
wh-sandbox branches to continue to serve as the base. It would
much better just to re-define it as something very close to the
current wh-sandbox (or build-improvements with wh-sandbox

One would think that with so many open source projects out there as
examples and the great minds that read this list, a working
development/release method could be achieved :-). But of course
this probably has been discussed many times on this list.

I just say this because I plan to work heavily on Doyen this summer
and would like to know "which" Axiom should I use.

By the way, what should be done with address@hidden
If we cannot keep it up to date, I think we should remove it, especially
now that the problems with sourceforge look like they have been solved.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]