On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 1:09:32 AM UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > TLDR; "supported platform" and "blocker ticket" are merely engineering > terms. There are not and cannot be as precise > as mathematical theorems :-) >
Still, if a standard package fails doctests on all systems it's a blocker. Also, if an optional package fails to build on all platforms it's a blocker as well. And that's it in my opinion. Everything else is only handled as critical, from my experience. As well, no attempt to promise that a particular version of gcc (or other > compiler) can be used to > build Sage on a particular supported platform is made. > That is not true because we make the promise that it builds with the shipped gcc (i.e. 7.2.0 atm). > In such a situation, the statement "Sage is fully supported on platform X" > has at best only fuzzy meaning. > And it's OK, as it seems that the commitment to fully support Sage on > every flavour of Linux out there is > not realistic, no matter how popular this flavour is. > > From this (and other) discussions here, it seems that "X is supported" > came to mean "there is at least one patchbot > running platform X". > That goes in circles because e.g. the fact that Sage still crashes in two doctests on OpenSuSE prevents people on that system from running a patchbot. And that ticket is not handled as a blocker. Given this, there should be no tickets made blockers merely on the basis > that Sage broke on your favourite patchbot or laptop... > Can we agree on "blocker" == "on all system"? -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
