Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 9:34:16 PM UTC-7 Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > I really dislike Github's decentralized approach with PR and having to > have separate clones of the repo within each user. My understanding is if > two people have different fixes, then they individually submit PRs that

Re: [sage-devel] nauty_gentourng is not available

Just to update: I compiled 9.6 from source and everything's as expected. Thanks On Saturday, 10 September 2022 at 01:05:07 UTC+2 Jakub Sliacan wrote: > Thanks Dima, > > Opened an issue as you suggested: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2125737. I'm surprised nobody > else has hit

Re: [sage-devel] Re: docstring of _element_constructor_

I try to make sure the ways (I first typed methods, but then realized this was confusing) to construct the elements is available either in the parent and/or element level documentation by way of examples (maybe saying, "We can construct a foo by giving it a list::"). Best, Travis On Saturday,

[sage-devel] Re: load deprecation warning in SageCell

Thank you for the suggestion, but I'd rather change the cell content as little as possible. I'm trying to present a simple interface to my freshmen students, so I think it'll be easier to tell them to ignore the warnings than to explain the extra code. (I was hoping the load command might have

Re: [sage-devel] nauty_gentourng is not available

Thanks Dima, Opened an issue as you suggested: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2125737. I'm surprised nobody else has hit the same issue yet, I just tried sage 9.4 and I can't get nauty generators to work either (slightly different behavior though). Anyways, thanks again. Jakub O

Re: [sage-devel] nauty_gentourng is not available

Hi Jakub, this looks like a Fedora packaging problem. Please report it to them. Dima On Fri, 9 Sep 2022, 23:12 Jakub Sliacan, wrote: > Hi! > > I'm using sage 9.6 on Fedora 36, installed via dnf. I am seeing the > following. The version of nauty package that I see installed is > nauty-2.7.4-1.fc

[sage-devel] nauty_gentourng is not available

Hi! I'm using sage 9.6 on Fedora 36, installed via dnf. I am seeing the following. The version of nauty package that I see installed is nauty-2.7.4-1.fc36.x86_64. ``` sage: for t in digraphs.tournaments_nauty(6): : print(t) : ---

Re: [sage-devel] Fwd: request for help: macOS PARI binaries

+1 from me. On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 9:18 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 10:40 AM Samuel Lelievre > wrote: > > > > Echoing a message posted to the pari-users mailing list. > > > > https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/archives/pari-users-2209/msg00015.html > > > > > > -- For

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 7:58 PM Thierry wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 04:07:48PM +0100, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > [...] > > > > Several people promised to look for academic hosting for trac. Nothing > > came out of it. > > Please do not rewrite history, as it adds violence to violence. There > h

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 04:07:48PM +0100, Dima Pasechnik wrote: [...] > > Several people promised to look for academic hosting for trac. Nothing > came out of it. Please do not rewrite history, as it adds violence to violence. There have indeed been offers for academic hosting, the VM were ready,

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in decomposition_type

Thanks for the report. There's a fix at #34514 , needs review. David On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:17 AM Björn Selander wrote: > Hi, > > running the Sage script > > K. = NumberField(x^4 + 18*x^2 - 1) > R. = K[] > L. = K.extension(y^2 + 9*a^3 - 2*a^2 + 162*a -

Re: [sage-devel] Fwd: request for help: macOS PARI binaries

On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 10:40 AM Samuel Lelievre wrote: > > Echoing a message posted to the pari-users mailing list. > > https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/archives/pari-users-2209/msg00015.html > > > -- Forwarded message (slightly edited) - > From: Bill Allombert > Date: 2022-09-08 07

Re: [sage-devel] Re: docstring of _element_constructor_

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 4:43 PM davida...@gmail.com wrote: > > I believe that the functionalities given by the method _element_constructor_ > should be at least mentioned in the main docstring of the Parent. > > For example, when typing: > > sage: QQ? > > Then, the ouput explains to the us

[sage-devel] Re: docstring of _element_constructor_

I believe that the functionalities given by the method _element_constructor_ should be at least mentioned in the main docstring of the Parent. For example, when typing: sage: QQ? Then, the ouput explains to the user how to construct a rational number. This is how I always used Sage. T

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 4:06 PM John Cremona wrote: > > To me, as a contributor of code to Sage who has not contributed at all > to the backend support, it seems that there is a clear majority in > favour of moving to github. As an ordinary developer I would be very > happy with that. > > It looks

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Fri, 9 Sep 2022, 15:48 Thierry, wrote: > Hi, > > "[prompted by FUNDING issues!!!]" ??? > > Back in 2016, when cloud hosting was imposed over academic hosting, > William promised "to pay for it indefinitely", see > https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/ed_ya-d-k_E/m/jYoR6opODAAJ > > If only

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

To me, as a contributor of code to Sage who has not contributed at all to the backend support, it seems that there is a clear majority in favour of moving to github. As an ordinary developer I would be very happy with that. It looks to me as if Frédéric's main issue with github is his final point

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 7:48:07 AM UTC-7 Thierry (sage-googlesucks@xxx) wrote: > - wiki is academically hosted and works pretty well. > Fees to the Sage community: 0$ per year Not really relevant for this thread, but: The wiki is dead. It has zero community and its only remaining purp

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 7:48:01 AM UTC-7 wst...@gmail.com wrote: > By not using GitHub we are losing many potential contributors to Sage. > GitHub is by far the most popular site for hosting of open source > projects, and potential Sage developers are likely to be familiar with > GitHub

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

Strong +1 on moving to GitHub as soon as possible. Very important to convert the complete Trac ticket history to GitHub issues/PRs. On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 2:54:06 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > I am resurrecting this thread, as in addition of trac continuing to eat up > funds (at

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

Hi, "[prompted by FUNDING issues!!!]" ??? Back in 2016, when cloud hosting was imposed over academic hosting, William promised "to pay for it indefinitely", see https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/ed_ya-d-k_E/m/jYoR6opODAAJ If only for this reason, there is no funding issue. The fact is th

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

Hi, By not using GitHub we are losing many potential contributors to Sage. GitHub is by far the most popular site for hosting of open source projects, and potential Sage developers are likely to be familiar with GitHub. Not using GitHub adds a huge barrier to entry for Sage development. For exam

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Fri, 9 Sep 2022, 15:26 Kwankyu Lee, wrote: > > the futre of the trac software itself. >> > > According to their developer mailing list > > https://groups.google.com/g/trac-dev > > the future of trac seems not so ominous to me. > 18 posts (in half a dozen threads) since beginning of 2022 does

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

> the futre of the trac software itself. > According to their developer mailing list https://groups.google.com/g/trac-dev the future of trac seems not so ominous to me. Perhaps publishing our fork of trac with customized plugins (?) to sagemath github repo may help increase the bus factor a

[sage-devel] BROADCAST : Trac maintenance

Dear Sage developers, in order to try to fix better the recent upgrade, the *trac web server will be turned off this saturday 10/09/2022*, from 7.00 (Paris time) to 23:00 (Paris time ; https://time.is/Paris). PLEASE take again a short break and resume using trac next week! Sorry for the inconv

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

Hi, let me forward the email of Frédéric as a whole, so that the thread remains complete. - Forwarded message from Frédéric Chapoton - Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2022 12:15:25 +0200 From: Frédéric Chapoton To: sagemath-adm...@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: i

Re: [sagemath-admins] Fwd: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 11:15 AM Frédéric Chapoton wrote: > > Dear sage developers and maintainers, > > Whereas I agree that we currently have two issues, I do not agree on the > necessity to switch to github and certainly not urgently. it is a disaster that new people can't come aboard easily. I

Re: [sage-devel] Re: incremental migration to github? [prompted by FUNDING issues!!!] + general flakiness of trac

I am resurrecting this thread, as in addition of trac continuing to eat up funds (at a rate of over US$ 10 per day at the moment), it has gotten increasingly broken. In particular, in the last 2 weeks no new developers can really join the project, as there is no normal* way to add new ssh keys

[sage-devel] Bug in decomposition_type

Hi, running the Sage script K. = NumberField(x^4 + 18*x^2 - 1) R. = K[] L. = K.extension(y^2 + 9*a^3 - 2*a^2 + 162*a - 38) dt = [L.decomposition_type(i) for i in K.primes_above(3)] print(dt) gives the output [[(1, 1, 2)], [(1, 1, 2)], [(1, 1, 1)]] The third element in the list ought to be n

[sage-devel] docstring of _element_constructor_

Dear all, as a user, how am I supposed to access the docstring of an _element_constructor_? For example, sage: P. = QQ[] sage: P? does not give me any hint about the various ways to construct a polynomial. If this is not possible other than "R._element_constructor_?", then, as developers, ho