commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Libbrecht <p...@activemath.org>
Subject Re: [all][nabla] proposition for a new project in sandbox
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:51:43 GMT
I would agree with Phil,

as long as Math is not modularized (which turned out to be quite a  
hassle for jelly but probably pays on the long run, especially now  
that maven 1.1 handles reactor cleanly) Nabla  should not be part of  
it. At least for the dependencies, it's quite different.

Will Nabla use math? Would there be some common part? The functions  
interfaces?
Maybe that is a question that needs to be answered soon.

paul


Le 14 avr. 08 à 03:37, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>  I agree with Torsten on this one.  Why doesn't this belong as a part
>>  of math (or maybe a submodule if math wants to have one)?
>
> Um...maybe for the same kind of reason that [functor] does not belong
> inside [collections] ;)
> We don't want to add it to [math] (at least immediately), because it
> does not really fit with the current focus of [math] and [math] is
> getting large, and will get larger in 2.0.  Nabla also should not
> depend on [math] either and could be used by itself.
> As I said, i think it is worth a try and in any case, we should be
> able to start it in the sandbox.



Mime
View raw message