On Sunday, November 16, 2014 11:08:36 AM UTC-8, Volker Braun wrote: > > On Sunday, November 16, 2014 6:53:43 PM UTC, john_perry_usm wrote: >> >> This may be because I downloaded a binary, but I don't think so. Even if >> so, it doesn't make sense: I only changed a few lines a Python code. >> > > I can think of lots of reasons how unpacking the binary tarball (and the > relocation script) can screw up time stamps. In any case, this is unrelated > to git. > > *After* that, Travis Scrimshaw made some very helpful changes, but he did >> them based on the development version. So, when I tried to work with it, so >> as to give it a positive review (which actually needed more work)... cue >> another complete rebuild of Sage. >> > > Really that is Travis' fault for doing an unnecessary merge. Which, in > turn, forced you to recompile to follow the merge. >
Well, not necessarily. I had the following situation recently: I was reviewing two tickets based on two different versions of Sage. Every time I moved between the branches, everything had to recompile. So at the end I rebased one of the patches to the most current version of Sage, so that I could review the tickets simultaneously. How else would you handle this situation? Of course that forced the author of the patch to recompile once for a long time ... Best, Anne -- 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 post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
