[Debian-science-sagemath] pari-sage or pari ?

[Ximin Luo]

jdemeyer at cage.ugent.be:
> 
>> There is generally a reason why a patch is rejected. If things go too slowly, it's ok to add it to your package -- as long as it's documented (see http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/ ).
> 
> So Debian also adds patches to upstream projects. Why is that OK but not for Sage? Why the double standard?
> 

You should be able to answer this for yourself, based on my previous comments in this thread.

>> But that doesn't mean packaging something under a name where users will get lost if they get the same-named software from another distribution : we're packaging an upstream project, not making something out of the blue!
>>
>> Instead of releasing foo-3.14+0xdeadbeef-p257 in sage-the-distribution as if it were "foo", which it isn't because you considered upstream's offering unsuitable and patched it left and right, just release sagefoo-3.14 in sage-the-distribution.
> 
> Is it really just a matter of naming? Because then the whole discussion is just silly....
> 

No, you're not even *trying to understand*. It's not just a matter of naming, but of maintaining a piece of code as well as upstream does. We're not going to release python2.7+sage1234 for other people to use as "python"; this would be totally irresponsible. Can you figure out for yourself why?

This discussion is going around in circles because you're not *trying to understand*. You're trying to pick out logical holes in what we're saying, but there is no hole - you're just not making the effort to sum together all the points we've made and form a coherent idea in your own head about what Debian is about.

I'd suggest we stop this discussion, until you can make this mental switch.

X

-- 
GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35
GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git