On Wednesday 9 October 2024 at 09:31:45 UTC-7 giaco...@gmail.com wrote:

1. This will be a very large PR, is this generally an OK thing to do?


Generally smaller PRs are easier to get merged, but I'm not sure if merging 
n PRs of size m takes more or less time than merging one PR of size n*m. If 
you can easily get some parts split off to merge as smaller PRs you'd be 
able to get a "foot in the door" by getting those merged. But if that 
really doesn't make sense, you could also prefer to stick with the large 
PR. Especially with a large PR, I would recommend to design it such that 
you DON'T change things outside of it. That way, the scope of your large PR 
remains limited. That makes review easier.

Further tie-in into the rest of the infrastructure, where you do need to 
touch files outside your primary domain is probably better done in 
follow-up PRs. You could already make them, but they would have a 
dependence on the main initial PR.
 

2. I believe it might be easier to make changes to this code in the current 
repo before merging to sage, so if people reading this want to contribute 
then we're discussing the code in the Sage zulip and we'd be happy for more 
people to look at and improve the code


You can try that, but I would expect that deviating from the normal flow of 
things (which is: a PR on sagemath) would slow down the review process. 
It's already hard to find people for that, and now you want them to follow 
a custom procedure? You may be able to get the best of both worlds by some 
git magic where you keep your own repo overlayed with the pull request. I 
don't know if a tree can live in two repositories at once or if there are 
ways to conveniently synchronize two subtrees of two distinct projects.
 
Mathematical comment: you'll get problems for mumford representation on 
nonsplit imaginary hyperelliptic curves of odd genus. You want an odd 
degree divisor to serve as a base of representing all classes and such a 
thing might simply not exist. Indeed, there may be points on the Jacobian 
that do not allow a representing divisor over the base field.

-- 
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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/c1d76251-c6c8-439d-b827-471fe1fd1923n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to