On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 11:42:46 AM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Francois Bissey
>> wrote:
>> > Release early, release often. In my experience in the last 8 years,
>> > especially release often - it h
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-17 16:32, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> If a critical
>> bug is found in released software it makes absolute sense to
>> prioritize a release for that bug.
>
>
> First of all, there have occasionally been bugfix releases of Sage:
> * htt
On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 11:42:46 AM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Francois Bissey
> > wrote:
> > Release early, release often. In my experience in the last 8 years,
> > especially release often - it has slowed down a bit, but it is still
> > often by any m
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-17 16:32, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> If a critical
>> bug is found in released software it makes absolute sense to
>> prioritize a release for that bug.
>
>
> Besides, isn't this exactly what I said? That the "release schedule should
On 2016-10-17 16:32, Erik Bray wrote:
If a critical
bug is found in released software it makes absolute sense to
prioritize a release for that bug.
Besides, isn't this exactly what I said? That the "release schedule
should depend on the urgency of open issues." If there is a very
important bu
On 2016-10-17 16:32, Erik Bray wrote:
If a critical
bug is found in released software it makes absolute sense to
prioritize a release for that bug.
First of all, there have occasionally been bugfix releases of Sage:
* http://www.sagemath.org/changelogs/sage-5.0.1.txt
* http://www.sagemath.org/c
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-17 15:27, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> What problems does it solve? First of all, I already mentioned
>> one--nobody but the "release manager" knows when a release is expected
>> to come out
>
>
> Who cares when a release is expected t
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
Who cares when a release is expected to come out?
I do, but very, very slightly.
We have a maintenance break at every monday after second tuesday of the
week. (That is, six days after Microsoft patch day.) I could plan upgrades
if I know in advance
On 2016-10-17 15:27, Erik Bray wrote:
What problems does it solve? First of all, I already mentioned
one--nobody but the "release manager" knows when a release is expected
to come out
Who cares when a release is expected to come out?
what the purpose of that release is, and what one can
expe
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-17 11:33, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> I'm mostly just talking about a policy that generates a (rough)
>> release schedule.
>
>
> Which problems would that solve? I don't really see the problem with the
> current "release whenever it's
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-17 11:38, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> But you're using a "milestone" to set what is effectively a resolution
>> status. Why should "normal" users be able to set
>> sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix? That seems like a decision for a
>> m
On 2016-10-17 11:33, Erik Bray wrote:
I'm mostly just talking about a policy that generates a (rough)
release schedule.
Which problems would that solve? I don't really see the problem with the
current "release whenever it's done" way of doing things, where
"whenever it's done" is largely arbi
On 2016-10-17 11:38, Erik Bray wrote:
But you're using a "milestone" to set what is effectively a resolution
status. Why should "normal" users be able to set
sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix? That seems like a decision for a
maintainer to make, at which point they can close the ticket.
The way
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Francois Bissey wrote:
>
>> To move to the kind of release schedule you are talking about
>> we’ll need a new release manager who has the vision for this kind
>> of things.
>
>
> What is Volker's vision? I.e. do he have
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Francois Bissey wrote:
To move to the kind of release schedule you are talking about
we’ll need a new release manager who has the vision for this kind
of things.
What is Volker's vision? I.e. do he have some plan in his head about when
to release 7.6?
I think that havin
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Francois Bissey
wrote:
>
>> On 17/10/2016, at 22:42, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Francois Bissey
>> wrote:
>>>
On 17/10/2016, at 22:33, Erik Bray wrote:
My point is, as it is I see no way to divine when or why a Sage
> On 17/10/2016, at 22:42, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Francois Bissey
> wrote:
>>
>>> On 17/10/2016, at 22:33, Erik Bray wrote:
>>>
>>> My point is, as it is I see no way to divine when or why a Sage
>>> release is coming out.
>>
>> Release early, release often.
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Erik Bray wrote:
>
>> I'm mostly just talking about a policy that generates a (rough)
>> release schedule.
>
>
> OK, so you mean something like Fedora release, where it was decided about
> half a year ago that version 2
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Francois Bissey
wrote:
>
>> On 17/10/2016, at 22:33, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> My point is, as it is I see no way to divine when or why a Sage
>> release is coming out.
>
> Release early, release often. In my experience in the last 8 years,
> especially release ofte
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Erik Bray wrote:
I'm mostly just talking about a policy that generates a (rough)
release schedule.
OK, so you mean something like Fedora release, where it was decided about
half a year ago that version 25 will be out at 2016-11-08 (and that was
later changed to 2016-11-1
> On 17/10/2016, at 22:33, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> My point is, as it is I see no way to divine when or why a Sage
> release is coming out.
Release early, release often. In my experience in the last 8 years,
especially release often - it has slowed down a bit, but it is still
often by any means.
T
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-14 16:23, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix is a terrible "milestone" and I
>> wouldn't mind getting rid of that too. That's a resolution status for
>> an issue, not project goal.
>
>
> Normal non-admin users
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Erik Bray wrote:
>
>> Does Sage have *any* kind of roadmap planning?
>
>
> No.
>
> What kind of roadmap it could be? If some developers are interested in graph
> theory, how to make them to add more linear algebra code
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Erik Bray wrote:
Does Sage have *any* kind of roadmap planning?
No.
What kind of roadmap it could be? If some developers are interested in
graph theory, how to make them to add more linear algebra code to Sage?
--
Jori Mäntysalo
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> I don't really use the milestones except for the
> sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix which indicates that there is nothing to
> merge.
>
> We don't really use trac for roadmap planning so there is no real
> significance to milestones, I guess.
D
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
>> As far as I know, the only real use-case for milestone is a milestone like
>> `sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix` or `sage-pending`. I think that every
>> milestone of the form `sage-X.Y` is essen
On Fri, 14 Oct 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
As far as I know, the only real use-case for milestone is a milestone like
`sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix` or `sage-pending`. I think that every
milestone of the form `sage-X.Y` is essentially treated equivalently.
I normally use "sage-N" and mark m
I don't really use the milestones except for
the sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix which indicates that there is nothing to
merge.
We don't really use trac for roadmap planning so there is no real
significance to milestones, I guess.
On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 4:07:06 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeye
On 2016-10-14 16:23, Erik Bray wrote:
sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix is a terrible "milestone" and I
wouldn't mind getting rid of that too. That's a resolution status for
an issue, not project goal.
Normal non-admin users cannot set a resolution, but they can set a
milestone.
--
You receive
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> As far as I know, the only real use-case for milestone is a milestone like
> `sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix` or `sage-pending`. I think that every
Well I'm not sure how you're defining "real use-case".
sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix is a
As far as I know, the only real use-case for milestone is a milestone
like `sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix` or `sage-pending`. I think that
every milestone of the form `sage-X.Y` is essentially treated equivalently.
So, we might as well git rid of the `sage-X.Y` milestones completely.
But the
On Trac, the milestone sage-7.3, which as been "completed", still has
193 "active" tickets (some of which haven't seen any activity on them
in years other than steadily bumping their milestone.
Anyone who's worked on a decent-sized project has had this problem
before, and it's completely understan
I'm starting to make use of this:
http://sage.math.washington.edu:9002/sage_trac/roadmap
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options,
33 matches
Mail list logo