On Sunday, November 16, 2014 8:08:36 PM UTC+1, 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. >
Okay, yes, in hindsight that's obvious. I suspect that's the reason for the first recompile. > *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. > I get that (Travis mentioned it himself), but I'm not sure why it's Travis' fault. First, the only change that needed to be made was a few lines of Python code. If we could download & test patches as before, this wouldn't be a problem. As it is, I basically gave the ticket a positive review by following his advice & hand-copying a few more changes he made, which is morally equivalent to the old way. :-) Second, wouldn't that test against the development version have to be made at some point, anyway? -- 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.
