On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Karl Forner wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Gábor Csárdi wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Karl Forner wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> Hmm, what if your package depends on packages A and B, and that A
>>> depends on C v1.0 and B depends on C v1.1 ? Th
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Gábor Csárdi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Karl Forner wrote:
> [...]
>
>> Hmm, what if your package depends on packages A and B, and that A depends
>> on C v1.0 and B depends on C v1.1 ? This is just an example but I imagine
>> that will lead to a lot
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Karl Forner wrote:
[...]
> Hmm, what if your package depends on packages A and B, and that A depends
> on C v1.0 and B depends on C v1.1 ? This is just an example but I imagine
> that will lead to a lot of complexities.
>
You'll have to be able to load (but not
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Karl Forner wrote:
> [...]
>
> - "exact deps versions":
>> will put a lot of burden of the developer.
>>
>
> Not really, in my opinion, if you have the proper tools. Most likely when
> you develop any given version of your package you'll use certain versions
> of
I agree with most of what you wrote, with one exception:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Karl Forner wrote:
[...]
> - "exact deps versions":
> will put a lot of burden of the developer.
>
Not really, in my opinion, if you have the proper tools. Most likely when
you develop any given version o
Interesting and strategic topic indeed.
One other point is that reproducibility (and backwards compatibility) is
also very important in the industry. To get acceptance it can really help
if you can easily reproduce results.
Concerning the arguments that I read in this discussion:
- "do it yourse
