Re: [sage-devel] distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

On Wednesday, March 10, 2021 at 4:50:41 AM UTC-6 Dima wrote: > numpy does this: > https://numpy.org/devdocs/docs/howto_build_docs.html > > you can only build numpy docs after numpy is installed. > Of course, with numpy "installed" doesn't necessarily mean installed in the main site-packages, y

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Downgrade R to optional? See #31409.

On Tarc#31409 , E. Madison Bray proposed to make R an optionalpackage only on Windows (which should be made possible by an upcoming patch of Matthias Koeppe). I replied : Arghhh… This would be a documentation nightmare (explaining why a ticket is “

Re: [sage-devel] distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

> On 11/03/2021, at 05:03, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 10, 2021 at 1:21:07 AM UTC-8 François Bissey wrote: > [...] building the documentation [...] > > In https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29868 I sketch a design that is in line > with modern Python packaging, in particula

Re: [sage-devel] distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

> On 11/03/2021, at 01:10, Antonio Rojas wrote: > > El miércoles, 10 de marzo de 2021 a las 10:21:07 UTC+1, François Bissey > escribió: > Instead of trying to fix the problem that you should be building the > documentation > before installing, the push to modularisation is currently used to

Re: [sage-devel] distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

> On 10/03/2021, at 23:50, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Mar 2021, 09:21 François Bissey, wrote: > So the situation is now: > * install package A > * install package B > * make a package C that takes B and applies it to the install of A and install > the documentation of A (not C). >

[sage-devel] Re: distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

On Wednesday, March 10, 2021 at 4:10:19 AM UTC-8 Antonio Rojas wrote: > As long as everything is still shipped in the Sage source tarball, isn't > it just a matter of changing a path in the build script? > That's right. As far as changes in src/ are concerned, what #30010 did was move src/sage

[sage-devel] Re: distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

On Wednesday, March 10, 2021 at 1:21:07 AM UTC-8 François Bissey wrote: > Sagemath as a meta distribution of stuff has bad habits in regards to > treating “sagelib” as a regular package. In short it doesn’t. > That's no longer true. sagelib is now a regular Python distribution called "sagemath

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Move MemoryAllocator to PyPI?

Here is my project (I just made the repository public): https://github.com/kliem/PyKPartiteKClique/tree/main/ The source folder is kpkc As you can see, I completely copied memory_allocator* This should be moved to its own project eventually. Instead of cimporting directly from cysignals (whic

Re: [sage-devel] Sage on Windows

With apologies for replying to such an old message, I should just note that I fixed this in the most recent Sage Windows release: https://github.com/sagemath/sage-windows/releases/tag/0.6.2-9.2 On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 8:29 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > This looks like https://trac.sagemath.org/tic

[sage-devel] Re: distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

On Wednesday, March 10, 2021 at 4:10:19 AM UTC-8 Antonio Rojas wrote: > Of course, if the long term plan is to split this to a separate git repo, > then I completely share your concerns. > No, the plan for modularization does not involve splitting the repository. See https://trac.sagemath.org

[sage-devel] Re: distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

On Wednesday, March 10, 2021 at 1:21:07 AM UTC-8 François Bissey wrote: > [...] building the documentation [...] In https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29868 I sketch a design that is in line with modern Python packaging, in particular build isolation. I welcome discussions based on this. --

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!]

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:33 PM tobia...@gmx.de wrote: > > > For what's worth, + 1 for migrating to github. > > The interface is cleaner, it has many more features and integrations, and is > more active which could attract more contributions. There are a few > scripts/tools that allow to migrat

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Move MemoryAllocator to PyPI?

On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 3:51 PM 'Jonathan Kliem' via sage-devel wrote: > > What I'm struggling with is the following: > > How do I cimport from different sources (runtime dependent probably > won't work, but compile time dependent would already be nice). At the > moment my package just pulls in cy

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Move MemoryAllocator to PyPI?

What I'm struggling with is the following: How do I cimport from different sources (runtime dependent probably won't work, but compile time dependent would already be nice). At the moment my package just pulls in cysignals during pip install and if this does not work it replaces those function

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Move MemoryAllocator to PyPI?

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 2:16 AM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > On Friday, February 12, 2021 at 2:35:45 PM UTC-8 vdelecroix wrote: >> >> Why make it part of cysignals? The purpose of the memory allocator >> is quite distinct from cysignals. Merging them look artificial to me. > > > Really? MemoryAlloca

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Downgrade R to optional? See #31409.

On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 6:13 PM Nathan Dunfield wrote: > > An update: I just tried three different binary versions on Linux: The Ubuntu > 20.04 binary posted at SageMath.org, the sagemath/sagemath:develop Docker > image, and conda on RHEL 7. None of them "just worked" with "sage -i foo". > The

[sage-devel] Re: distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

El miércoles, 10 de marzo de 2021 a las 10:21:07 UTC+1, François Bissey escribió: > Instead of trying to fix the problem that you should be building the > documentation > before installing, the push to modularisation is currently used to > enshrine the > current situation. #30010 actually sep

Re: [sage-devel] distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

On Wed, 10 Mar 2021, 09:21 François Bissey, wrote: > Hi all, > > So today I will be talking about subject that I in sage-on-gentoo have > brushed under the carpet for years focusing on helping to be able to > use more and more components of the system and ultimately get “sagelib” > to be one such

[sage-devel] distro packaging, docbuilding and modularisation

Hi all, So today I will be talking about subject that I in sage-on-gentoo have brushed under the carpet for years focusing on helping to be able to use more and more components of the system and ultimately get “sagelib” to be one such component. Sagemath as a meta distribution of stuff has bad ha

Re: [sage-devel] trac notification emails

I will ask the IT service of Inria. Thank you Dima. Le mercredi 10 mars 2021 à 01:15:15 UTC+1, dim...@gmail.com a écrit : > > > On Tue, 9 Mar 2021, 22:41 David Coudert, wrote: > >> I don't know why, but apparently I don't receive notification emails from >> the trac server since a couple of da