On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:38 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>> This morning I wanted to install sage on another machine so I went to the
>> sage installation guide to remind myself where to clone the git repository
>> from. As far as I can see, there's no mention of git anywhere in this guide.
>> In partic
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
Ltd) wrote:
>
> On 21 Nov 2014 22:22, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote:
>
>> I'd say it's OK to have such a code, but it's not really OK to actively
>> enforce
>> it. Such an active enforcement would only be counterproductive, if not
>> ou
In #17194, (rather minimal) bindings for the optional package Arb are provided.
The module sage.rings.real_arb is only compiled if arb is actually installed,
because otherwise, compilation would fail.
Therefore, I cannot include sage/rings/real_arb into
src/doc/en/reference/rings_numerical/index.
[X] Yes -- adopt the code of conduct stated [above] (*)
Travis
--
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
[X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below
Vincent
--
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 t
Looking at the log file, the error is actually
sys:1: RuntimeWarning: not adding directory '' to sys.path since it's
writable by an untrusted group.
Untrusted users could put files in this directory which might then be
imported by your Python code. As a general precaution from similar
exp
The files in /usr/lib/python2.7 are not relevant. What is in the
local/lib/python directory of the Sage installation? There should be a
docutils directory there.
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 8:21:29 PM UTC-8, kksurendran wrote:
>
> Compilation of sage-6.4.tar.gz resulted in the error attached
configure: error: cannot import Python module "distutils".
It is not a permission problem as shown by the above line in the log.
I have explained the matter in a new post as the same situation prevails in
sage-6.4.
On Saturday, 7 June 2014 02:22:13 UTC-4, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> From your logs it
Compilation of sage-6.4.tar.gz resulted in the error attached.
On going to the subshell after executing
$ cd '/usr/local/sage-6.4/local/var/tmp/sage/build/pynac-0.3.2' &&
'/usr/local/sage-6.4/sage' --sh
One can configure and make in the pynac-0.3.2/src directory provided one
runs the command
> On 23/11/2014, at 13:47, William Stein wrote:
>
> [ ] Yes -- adopt the code of conduct stated below (*)
>
> [X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below
François
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from
[x] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below
David Kirkby
--
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 p
>
> (This was not the only factor affecting my vote.)
>
>
Just to make it clear, I think we should assume William is intending for
any "friendly amendments" due to incorrect grammar or spelling (or even not
pointing out what the abbreviation PST means to those around the globe) to
be taken up
[X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below
Grammar mismatch, line 1:
> The Sage community is comprised of
^
One of "comprises", "is composed of", or "consists of" would be better.
(This was not the only factor affecting my vote.)
--
You received this mess
[X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below
--
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 g
[X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below
--
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 g
Hello Sage Developers,
This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of
conduct. I will close voting on Monday at midnight PST. (If the vote
is an exact tie, then that means "No" - there must be a simple
majority for this to pass.) Any member of the sage-devel mailing
list may
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 10:02:09 PM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> Let me point out that we're discussing a rather different kind of "law",
> which is about morality/ethics, and not about economics.
> Contrary to contract laws, morality laws are known to be notoriously
> counterproducti
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
Ltd) wrote:
> Do you think a
> code of conduct would lead to any benefits due to "passive" means, and if so
> how?
I don't want to answer for him, but I still see a point here. Even
though there is no active enforcement, pointin
On 21 Nov 2014 22:22, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote:
> I'd say it's OK to have such a code, but it's not really OK to actively
enforce
> it. Such an active enforcement would only be counterproductive, if not
> outright impossible.
>
> Dima
Is there any point in having something that is not enforced? Th
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 6:05:47 PM UTC, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> but then you're essentially forced to tie (un)preparsing closer to
> IPython. I doubt that this is the right thing to do.
Why not? IPython is, at its core, a library to apply transformations to
sources and evaluate them wi
On 2014-11-22, john_perry_usm wrote:
> --=_Part_158_386696038.1416656717612
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="=_Part_159_914794844.1416656717613"
>
> --=_Part_159_914794844.1416656717613
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Saturday, November 22, 201
On 22 Nov 2014 18:38, "William Stein" wrote:
> I will start a new thread on sage-devel with a clear title "VOTE: code
> of conduct", copy of the proposed code, and [ ] Yes/ [ ] No option,
I hope that your vote states how the code of conduct will be administered,
how readers of sage-abuse will be
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 4:17 AM, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Viviane,
>
> On 2014-11-22, Viviane Pons wrote:
>> Simon mentioned many times that "don't feed the troll" was the right thing
>> to do. In my opinion, it is not quite enough. Let's say you receive a
>> personal attack on a thread if you leav
On 2014-11-22 13:51, Volker Braun wrote:
IPython colorizes the tracebacks (at least by default, unless you turn
it off) and adds the source line for command-line input. I think
unpreparsing could easily be added on top of that:
Of course it *could* be done (assuming upstream accepts it of course)
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Bill Page wrote:
> On 21 November 2014 at 20:18, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
>>
>> I am still confused about one thing: is this issue is already
>> present in FriCAS before your changes? Because you can
>> already use conjugate, sin, +, *, ..., even without defining the
Am Samstag, 22. November 2014 16:48:09 UTC+1 schrieb Nicolas M. Thiéry:
Conclusion:
>
[...]
Of course, nothing beats leading by example.
>
> Given that a formal Code of Conduct seems to make uncomfortable some
> developers for whom I have a strong respect, I am not anymore in favor
> of
On 21 November 2014 at 20:18, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Bill Page wrote:
>>
>> You are right about the derivative. But my limited understanding
>> is that the strategy is not to avoid 'abs(x)' but rather to avoid 'sin'.
>> We cannot similarly avoid 'conjugate' and i
A bit late for the vote but here is, for whatever it's worth, my
current perspective on the matter. The many interesting and
complementary view points that were expressed in this discussion were
quite influential; so thanks everybody for your participation!
Feel free to jump down to the conclusio
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Jean Bétréma wrote:
> Oops, imho a permutation is a very elementary object, coding it is not so
> hard,
Why do you come to that conclusion? I'm not so sure.
> Moreover the construction
> "Permutation([4,1,2,5,3])" suggests that this is the right way, and indeed:
Hello !
>
sage.combinat.permutation.StandardPermutations_all_with_category.element_class
> AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute
> 'StandardPermutations_all_with_category'
>
> I'm somewhat aware of the motivations of those who "categorize" code for
> combinatorial objects, but yes I'm d
Le vendredi 21 novembre 2014 20:35:47 UTC+1, Harald Schilly a écrit :
>
>
> > Sure this answer by Sage is less cryptic:
> >
> > sage: p=Permutation([4,1,2,5,3])
> > sage: type(p)
> > 'sage.combinat.permutation.StandardPermutations_all_with_category.element_class'>
> >
> > but it prevents me (and p
On 21 November 2014 at 20:18, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
>
> I am still confused about one thing: is this issue is already
> present in FriCAS before your changes? Because you can
> already use conjugate, sin, +, *, ..., even without defining the
> derivative for abs(x). I fail to see how defining the a
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 8:53:16 AM UTC, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> > 5) beautify the traceback
> I assume with "beautify" you mean the graphical layout of the traceback?
> Because IPython doesn't really change the contents of the traceback
> (like unpreparsing).
>
IPython colorizes the t
Hi Viviane,
On 2014-11-22, Viviane Pons wrote:
> Simon mentioned many times that "don't feed the troll" was the right thing
> to do. In my opinion, it is not quite enough. Let's say you receive a
> personal attack on a thread if you leave it just there, it's not helping
> you:
>
> * the thread wa
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 11:39:00 AM UTC+1, john_perry_usm wrote:
> I repeat that a code that isn't enforced is worse than no code at all.
>
I want to elaborate on this briefly, since people who have expressed the
contrary opinion deserve more than a bald assertion.
I'll explain by exampl
2014-11-21 23:48 GMT+01:00 Simon King :
>
>
> In some post in this thread it was claimed that another post was sexist,
> even though there was enough reason to refuse the claim. One person imputed
> bad intention to another person, without considering "in dubio pro". Such
> questionable, annoying
2014-11-22 11:39 GMT+01:00 john_perry_usm :
> On Friday, November 21, 2014 11:48:53 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote:
>>
>> In some post in this thread it was claimed that another post was sexist,
>> even though there was enough reason to refuse the claim. One person imputed
>> bad intention to another
I'm curious: should the discussion here be considered a vote? A lot of
people may not be reading it for various reasons, thinking it's only a
discussion. Perhaps a vote would be more suitable in a thread titled,
"Please vote for or against a code of conduct."
I'm not objecting; I'm just curious
On Friday, November 21, 2014 11:48:53 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote:
>
> In some post in this thread it was claimed that another post was sexist,
> even though there was enough reason to refuse the claim. One person imputed
> bad intention to another person, without considering "in dubio pro". Such
Let me explain further:
#71 is mostly about displaying unpreparsed code in tracebacks.
Currently, IPython doesn't do this. Given that we also need to support
this for code from load() and attach(), I think the following three
should be implemented in the same place (either all in Sage or all i
On 2014-11-21 18:21, Volker Braun wrote:
Its not brain surgery, but you want
1) Apply the preparser, possibly other input transformations
2) handle syntax errors from the preparser and show an appropriate error
(not: a traceback inside the preparser)
3) handle errors from the string -> ast com
41 matches
Mail list logo
