No, Nils, that's not good enough.
On Friday, August 23, 2024 at 8:50:24 AM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
Dima has already pointed out a substantial similarity between the proposals.
On Friday 23 August 2024 at 08:44:03 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
Well, Nils? Please be specific.
On Wednesday, Augus
Dear Matthias,
Dima has already pointed out a substantial similarity between the proposals.
Kind regards,
Nils
On Friday 23 August 2024 at 08:44:03 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> Well, Nils? Please be specific.
>
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 2:38:59 PM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>
>>
Well, Nils? Please be specific.
On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 2:38:59 PM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 1:48:39 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> On the google groups comment linked to by the second reference you give,
> Dima does link to a very explicit proposal
On Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 6:17:14 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:45 PM Nathan Dunfield
wrote:
> As I understand it, while both proposals result in binary wheels being
pulled off PyPI for certain standard packages, they differ in that:
>
> a) The current proposal
On 21 August 2024 22:01:40 BST, Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 1:48:39 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
>
>On the google groups comment linked to by the second reference you give,
>Dima does link to a very explicit proposal that does share substantial
>features with the p
On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 1:48:39 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
On the google groups comment linked to by the second reference you give,
Dima does link to a very explicit proposal that does share substantial
features with the proposed policy change discussed here.
Nils, what are these "sub
On 21 August 2024 18:12:55 BST, Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 7:33:26 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>I don't consider this approved, as my complaint about the previous
>discussions and related proposals and credits due is not addressed
>
>
>I'll note that extraor
On Wednesday 21 August 2024 at 13:16:48 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 7:33:26 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
I don't consider this approved, as my complaint about the previous
discussions and related proposals and credits due is not addressed
I'll note that extr
On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 7:33:26 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
I don't consider this approved, as my complaint about the previous
discussions and related proposals and credits due is not addressed
I'll note that extraordinary claims such as those that Dima Pasechnik made
above in
htt
I don't consider this approved, as my complaint about the previous discussions
and related proposals and credits due is not addressed, and the technical
discussion on how we implement this is not finished.
Dima
On 19 August 2024 19:16:54 BST, Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>On Sunday, August 4, 20
On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 10:54:22 AM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
What is currently not clear to me is *where* those binary wheels are going
to come from
The upstream project is building them and depositing them on PyPI.
and how we're going to test/ensure that they are available for the
pl
On Tuesday 20 August 2024 at 10:03:59 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 9:02:14 AM UTC-7 julian...@fsfe.org wrote:
I consider this approved.
While I don't think I would be opposed to the proposal here, I believe that
our policy says that for a disputed PR to be "appr
You also mentioned the PR in your quote. I just wanted to clarify that the
PR itself is not approved. I am glad that we agree on this :)
julian
On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 8:03:59 PM UTC+3 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 9:02:14 AM UTC-7 julian...@fsfe.org wrote:
>
>
On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 9:02:14 AM UTC-7 julian...@fsfe.org wrote:
I consider this approved.
While I don't think I would be opposed to the proposal here, I believe that
our policy says that for a disputed PR to be "approved," a vote needs to
happen here or on the PR.
Julian, you snip
I consider this approved.
While I don't think I would be opposed to the proposal here, I believe that
our policy says that for a disputed PR to be "approved," a vote needs to
happen here or on the PR.
The implementation of the binary wheel infrastructure in
https://github.com/sagemath/sa
On Sunday, August 4, 2024 at 11:03:38 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
Currently all "standard" packages of the Sage distribution, by policy (
https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/packaging.html; recommended
reading),
- either can be installed from source ("normal" packages);
- or they are
Nathan explained it correctly.
On Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 1:45:21 PM UTC-7 Nathan Dunfield wrote:
> Dima,
>
> As I understand it, while both proposals result in binary wheels being
> pulled off PyPI for certain standard packages, they differ in that:
>
> a) The current proposal requires the v
On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:45 PM Nathan Dunfield wrote:
> As I understand it, while both proposals result in binary wheels being pulled
> off PyPI for certain standard packages, they differ in that:
>
> a) The current proposal requires the version of the package to be pinned
> (with checksums).
Do
Dima,
As I understand it, while both proposals result in binary wheels being
pulled off PyPI for certain standard packages, they differ in that:
a) The current proposal requires the version of the package to be pinned
(with checksums).
b) The current proposal does not allow a package to pull i
Nathan,
this is essentially the proposal I put forward in Feb 2024:
https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/5kmxaw105lg/m/QGShvy6-AAAJ
You didn't like it then.
https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/5kmxaw105lg/m/N-eEEQTeAgAJ
Dima
PS. Nobody seems to remember that conversation? Is it forbidde
This proposal makes sense to me. Something like this is necessary for us
to upgrade Jupyter since it depends on rdps-py which needs Rust to build,
and this approach preserves the other features of current standard
packages: the version is pinned (including checksums on the binary wheels)
and a
Does this mean that there will be different sage tarballs for supported
platforms?
--
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...@googlegr
22 matches
Mail list logo
