On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 1:29:14 AM UTC-7, kcrisman wrote:
>
> I think just before a stable release is probably the *best* time to add a
> stopgap, since it's unlikely it will be fixed in the last rc :)
>
Indeed, making an invasive change in an rc which probably causes widespread
and hard t
At least a user could look at the list of bugs silently producing wrong
answers:
http://trac.sagemath.org/report/79
I updated the list by manually looking at open tickets from #1 to #13345
and adding a stopgap marker 'todo' if required.
Remaining task (I will do that):
check open tickets #133
On Friday, 9 October 2015 10:36:35 UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 7:08:19 PM UTC+2, William wrote:
>>
>> the copyright notice above very explicitly states that "all
>> rights reserved"
>
>
> As you said, thats a no-op:
> http://www.iusmentis.com/copyright/allrights
Le vendredi 09 oct. 2015 à 09:43:31 (-0700), Dima Pasechnik a écrit :
>
> On Friday, 9 October 2015 09:26:48 UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> >
> > > we talk about nauty being included into Sage - the permission is being
> > given
> > > for this, and only this, AFAIU...
> >
> > I don't think that "
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 7:08:19 PM UTC+2, William wrote:
>>
>> the copyright notice above very explicitly states that "all
>> rights reserved"
>
>
> As you said, thats a no-op:
> http://www.iusmentis.com/copyright/allrightsreserved/
>
>
On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 7:08:19 PM UTC+2, William wrote:
>
> the copyright notice above very explicitly states that "all
> rights reserved"
As you said, thats a no-op:
http://www.iusmentis.com/copyright/allrightsreserved/
The modified nauty-h.in does give permission to everything except
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, 9 October 2015 07:44:55 UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote:
>>
>> Looks great; The two restrictions
>>
>> * * You must not remove this section of the text, containing author
>> *
>> * attribution, copyright notice, and legal discl
On Friday, 9 October 2015 09:26:48 UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> > we talk about nauty being included into Sage - the permission is being
> given
> > for this, and only this, AFAIU...
>
> I don't think that " + must only be used in Sage" is
> GPL-compatible.
>
As long we we do not write t
> we talk about nauty being included into Sage - the permission is being given
> for this, and only this, AFAIU...
I don't think that " + must only be used in Sage" is GPL-compatible.
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To un
On Friday, 9 October 2015 09:12:51 UTC-7, Snark wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Le vendredi 09 oct. 2015 ą 07:30:06 (-0700), Dima Pasechnik a écrit :
> > On Thursday, 8 October 2015 11:46:34 UTC-7, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2015-10-08 20:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> > > > if it talks about chan
On Friday, 9 October 2015 07:44:55 UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Looks great; The two restrictions
>
> * * You must not remove this section of the text, containing author
>*
> * attribution, copyright notice, and legal disclaimer.
> *
> * * You must clearly m
Hi,
Le vendredi 09 oct. 2015 ą 07:30:06 (-0700), Dima Pasechnik a écrit :
> On Thursday, 8 October 2015 11:46:34 UTC-7, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> >
> > On 2015-10-08 20:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> > > if it talks about changes, this means changes are allowed, no?
> > Well, in principle I agree, bu
Looks great; The two restrictions
* * You must not remove this section of the text, containing author
*
* attribution, copyright notice, and legal disclaimer.
*
* * You must clearly mark modified versions of this software
*
* as differing from
-- Forwarded message --
From: Brendan McKay
Date: 9 October 2015 at 02:45
Subject: Re: nauty in Sage (was: Code generating finite posets of given
size (fwd))
To: Dima Pasechnik
Cc: Jori Mäntysalo , gunnar.brinkm...@ugent.be,
b...@cs.anu.edu.au
Dear Dima,
Please replace nauty-h.
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 11:46:34 UTC-7, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2015-10-08 20:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> > if it talks about changes, this means changes are allowed, no?
> Well, in principle I agree, but it's safer not to assume anything.
>
Brendan replied that remaining two clauses i
On 9 October 2015 at 10:00, John Cremona wrote:
> On 9 October 2015 at 09:44, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>>> Disclaimer -- I did not wrote that code and did not know it was there!
>>
>> Same here :-P
>>
>>> I agree that having this hidden away in graphs.py is not sensible, and
>>> having it in src/sag
> I can do that independently, if it will not cause conflicts with your
> ongoing work.
Works for me. You can base your branch on whatever you are using right
now, and I will rebase it (if needed) atop of my refactoring. There
will probably be a conflict, but very a probably one that is solved
eas
On 9 October 2015 at 09:44, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>> Disclaimer -- I did not wrote that code and did not know it was there!
>
> Same here :-P
>
>> I agree that having this hidden away in graphs.py is not sensible, and
>> having it in src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ is more sensible.
>>
>> How sh
> Disclaimer -- I did not wrote that code and did not know it was there!
Same here :-P
> I agree that having this hidden away in graphs.py is not sensible, and
> having it in src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ is more sensible.
>
> How shall we do this? Would it work to make that a separate tick
Disclaimer -- I did not wrote that code and did not know it was there!
I agree that having this hidden away in graphs.py is not sensible, and
having it in src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ is more sensible.
How shall we do this? Would it work to make that a separate ticket
from anything else yo
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, kcrisman wrote:
At http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17164 it seems that Sage 6.8 has not
support for vulnerable SSLv3 anymore. But it still seems to have - at
least on SageNB.
Dima was the one who green lighted that, I assume he can confirm it's not a
problem.
Anything
P.S.: It seems that this code is not called by *any* part of Sage:
(read|…)~/sage$ grep "elliptic_curve_congruence" . -R
./graphs/graph.py: - ``'elliptic_curve_congruence'`` - data must be an
./graphs/graph.py:elif format == 'elliptic_curve_congruence':
No doctest, no other functio
I will note that sometimes stopgaps are harder to implement than in other
cases. For instance, sometimes integrals returned are wrong; but then
again, they likely always will be (and not just in Sage/Maxima) so it's
hard to imagine having every single use of integration return a warning.
But
Hello everybody,
It is possible to build a graph with the following syntax:
Graph(something, format="elliptic_curve_congruence")
I will attempt to refactor Graph.__init__ today, and I am a bit
embarassed by the corresponding block of code (~30 lines, at line
1602) in graph.py that deals with
24 matches
Mail list logo
