On May 5, 2008, at 10:39 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I'll second the fact that coercion is not going to be done by the
>> 3.0.2 release cycle, but hopefully soon after that. I should be able
>> to work on it a
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Robert Bradshaw
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'll second the fact that coercion is not going to be done by the
> 3.0.2 release cycle, but hopefully soon after that. I should be able
> to work on it a bit this week, but maybe next week we could give it a
> big
I'll second the fact that coercion is not going to be done by the
3.0.2 release cycle, but hopefully soon after that. I should be able
to work on it a bit this week, but maybe next week we could give it a
big push and try to get it (mostly) wrapped up. Also, we would
greatly appreciate any
I'm not going to be able to work much more on coercion until next
week, and I don't get the impression that Robert has much time this
week either. It's probably best to put coercion off until after
3.0.2.
David
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:44 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello folks
I've been thinking more about how to handle deprecated functionality.
See
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/1e7d8b8880211b80/34e374ed36977b31
for our initial discussion. There, the conclusions seemed to be:
1. We should have a DEPRECATED section of the docstring
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Franco Saliola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I want to install Sage on a multi-user machine and allow multiple
> users to develop from that installation.
This is absolutely definitely not supported. I have no idea how one
could do this at present.
Hello,
I want to install Sage on a multi-user machine and allow multiple
users to develop from that installation. But it appears that "sage
-clone" wants access to $SAGE_ROOT/devel, which is not good for
multiple users. One can clone the devel/sage branch using hg:
sage -hg clone $SAGE_ROOT/de
Jason Grout wrote:
> William Stein wrote:
>> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:57 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Your question is equivalent to, "Do we want to allow people to charge
>>> money for running Sage, but not redistributing it?"
>> No, it isn't equivalent to that. That is a different and
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 1:02 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My computation of bernoulli(10^7+4) using GP version 2.3.3 has completed in
> 217417011 miliseconds. That's about 2 days, 12 hours. Anybody know how I
> can print the thing to file?
>
So PARI is already over twice as fast as Mat
William Stein wrote:
> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:57 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Your question is equivalent to, "Do we want to allow people to charge
>> money for running Sage, but not redistributing it?"
>
> No, it isn't equivalent to that. That is a different and interesting
> questio
> Even if we could, I think David is just generally curious about what
> we as Sage developers want. I think you've so far expressed your
> opinion that you're fine with such usage of Sage.
Yes
>
> I'll also go on record next to say that I'm fine with sombody using a modified
> closed version o
My computation of bernoulli(10^7+4) using GP version 2.3.3 has completed in
217417011 miliseconds. That's about 2 days, 12 hours. Anybody know how I can
print the thing to file?
Machine:
Quad-core 2.0Ghz Xeon, 1333MHz FSB, 32GB RAM.
Currently, my gp session is using 4GB of RAM.
--~--~-
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:57 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your question is equivalent to, "Do we want to allow people to charge
> money for running Sage, but not redistributing it?"
No, it isn't equivalent to that. That is a different and interesting
question, but it is not equivalent.
>
2008/5/5 Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> On May 5, 2008, at 12:07 PM, John Cremona wrote:
> >
> > 2008/5/5 Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >> On May 5, 2008, at 8:32 AM, John Cremona wrote:
> >>
> >>> I took a quick look at Ondrej's detailed changelog, and was
> >>>
On May 5, 2008, at 12:07 PM, John Cremona wrote:
>
> 2008/5/5 Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> On May 5, 2008, at 8:32 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>>
>>> I took a quick look at Ondrej's detailed changelog, and was
>>> interested
>>> to see that major speedups had been made by technical-lo
2008/5/5 Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> On May 5, 2008, at 8:32 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>
> > I took a quick look at Ondrej's detailed changelog, and was interested
> > to see that major speedups had been made by technical-looking changes
> > to __eq__ and __ne__ functions.
> >
>
On May 4, 2008, at 12:49 PM, David Kohel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Tensor products (of commutative rings) are "necessary" for
> representing the
> coordinate rings of a product of [affine] schemes.
>
> For commutative rings, a new tensor product class imay not be needed
> or desirable, rather what is miss
Your question is equivalent to, "Do we want to allow people to charge money for
running Sage, but not redistributing it?"
I say, yes. Imagine a private contractor who uses Sage. Perhaps this person
modifies their version of Sage to include a proprietary algorithm. Then, they
charge their cl
On May 5, 2008, at 8:32 AM, John Cremona wrote:
> I took a quick look at Ondrej's detailed changelog, and was interested
> to see that major speedups had been made by technical-looking changes
> to __eq__ and __ne__ functions.
>
> When I was testing the generic groups code for Sage a month or two
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 10:25 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On May 5, 7:21 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> > I'm wondering if this is allowed under the GPL and if so, if that is
> > what we want:
> > Joe Shmoe installs SAGE on a webserver,
On May 5, 7:21 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi:
Hi,
> I'm wondering if this is allowed under the GPL and if so, if that is
> what we want:
> Joe Shmoe installs SAGE on a webserver, renames it say to SmMATH, and
> charge a fee to anyone who wants to use it over the web. No in
Hi:
I'm wondering if this is allowed under the GPL and if so, if that is
what we want:
Joe Shmoe installs SAGE on a webserver, renames it say to SmMATH, and
charge a fee to anyone who wants to use it over the web. No indication that
it is open source or free or anything. (Note: For example, Shmoe
Hello folks,
as you might have notices 3.0.1 is finally out. We currently have
nearly fifty patches in trac, i.e.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/report/13
Feel free to review patches and obviously also upload more fixes.
3.0.2 is also supposed to be another bug fix release with few deep
cha
I took a quick look at Ondrej's detailed changelog, and was interested
to see that major speedups had been made by technical-looking changes
to __eq__ and __ne__ functions.
When I was testing the generic groups code for Sage a month or two
ago, using the profiler, I was concerned to see what a la
Hello folks,
Sage 3.0.1 has been released on May 4th, 2008. It is available at
http://sagemath.org/download.html
* About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org)
Sage is developed by volunteers and combines 71 open source packages.
It is available for download from sagemath.org and its mirror
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 3:46 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On May 5, 3:41 pm, "Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
>> That would indeed be useful. Maybe even links to the respective commits? :)
>>
>> At least I like to browse how each major feature was implemented,
Built and tested all ok (without PBUILD since that caused problems for me).
John
2008/5/5 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> One more rather important thing: The really final sources are at
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/dist/src/sage-3.0.1.tar
>
> The problem with the previously posted tar ball
On May 5, 3:41 pm, "Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> That would indeed be useful. Maybe even links to the respective commits? :)
>
> At least I like to browse how each major feature was implemented, for
> learning purposes. In SymPy, we do this:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/sympy
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Michael Abshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we are listing major features for Sage 3.0.1 at
>
> http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-3.0.1
>
> Currently we would like you to add some text, i.e. a couple sentences,
> describing what is new/changed/improved so t
Hi,
we are listing major features for Sage 3.0.1 at
http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-3.0.1
Currently we would like you to add some text, i.e. a couple sentences,
describing what is new/changed/improved so that someone who is not a
specialist can understand what was added.
Convex Hulls And Po
One more rather important thing: The really final sources are at
http://www.sagemath.org/dist/src/sage-3.0.1.tar
The problem with the previously posted tar ball was that the pngs were
broken. So if you plan to provide binaries you *must* build with that
tar ball. I am replacing the one in my hom
31 matches
Mail list logo
