On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Ivan Andrus <darthand...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 1, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Keshav Kini wrote: >> kcrisman <kcris...@gmail.com> writes: >>> On Mar 1, 9:20 am, Keshav Kini <keshav.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> The main thing I want for Sage's development process is a push/pull >>>> architecture of some kind. I don't mind if that ends up meaning that we >>>> finally start using Mercurial in the way it was "meant" to be used, >>> >>> Using HG in this way has been a request for at least three or four >>> years, and probably since when Sage switched from darcs to hg. >>> >>> Is doing all this stuff in Mercurial an option, especially for folks >>> like sage-combinat who have spent a lot of time taking people who are >>> *not* hard-core programmers, but want to do research math, up to speed >>> in hg? This seems like a potential halfway point, assuming that there >>> is a site which would want to host this all - Sage seems so huge, I'm >>> kind of surprised even github would want to host it for free, though I >>> guess it's GPL... >> >> I am very far from convinced that sage-combinat developers have been >> learning anything substantial about *Mercurial*. Going by what I see on >> the wiki pages about combinat, what a lot of time has been spent on is >> taking people who are not hard-core programmers and teaching them how to >> plant in and help to fertilize a colorful garden of *patch files*. >> >> Learning git will be about equal to learning "real" Mercurial in terms >> of head-scratching required, in my estimation (though of course I could >> be wrong). Furthermore I intend to write a script called >> $SAGE_LOCAL/bin/sage-dev which will walk people through the process of >> using git to work on Sage - basically a "wizard", asking yes/no >> questions and soliciting input with ample explanatory text - which I >> believe will be pretty intuitive and simple, though we'll see how true >> that is once I set out concrete design goals and ask for feedback. >> >> For what it's worth, I have emailed the main sage-combinat developers a >> little while ago and asked them for an overview of what I should keep in >> mind when designing this SEP, so don't worry too much about >> sage-combinat :) They will be kept informed at every step and included >> in our planning discussions. > > I'm not involved with sage-combinat so maybe this will be addressed in their > work flow, but I have a question as to how one uses a version of sage with > many patches applied. > > For example, lets say that while using Sage I have found 4 (unrelated) bugs, > one of which has a fix on trac that is being reviewed (or whatever). Two of > the others I fix myself and put up for review. With a queue-based approach > it is entirely trivial to have an instance of sage running that includes any > combination of these fixes that I can use to test or (perhaps more > importantly) do my actual calculations and research. And at any point I can > update any of the fixes and go right back to work. > > I assume (since it's git) that there is some magic that will let me specify N > branches and then merge > them into an unnamed branch that
It will be named, not unnamed. You could call it "unnamed" if you want. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org