> I feel like the process of "download patches from a ticket, apply in
> some order, rebuild and test, and commit" makes sense as a menu-based
> text interface, especially if you want to do several in a row. Or am I
> the only one that likes that idea? I did spend too much time on MUDs
> in high s
Marshall Hampton wrote:
> That sounds awesome - convert the entire Sage development process to
> an online RPG, where the basic quests are merging tickets!
Fantastic. What can I do with my gold? And can we start a graph theory
clan (or whatever the groups are called)?
William's clan will pro
That sounds awesome - convert the entire Sage development process to
an online RPG, where the basic quests are merging tickets!
-Marshall
On Jun 9, 3:34 am, Craig Citro wrote:
> > I've been
> > thinking about writing something like this up for a while now, but
> > there's never enough time to d
> I've been
> thinking about writing something like this up for a while now, but
> there's never enough time to do everything one wants to in Sage :)
>
For the record, I'm in the process of writing a first system for doing
this right now. It's mostly done (I can automatically get a string of
patc
2009/6/9 Robert Bradshaw :
>
> On Jun 9, 2009, at 1:17 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>
>>
Dream feature: having a button on the trac ticket web page that
would
run this script on sage.math (don't know if this is easily doable
though).
>>>
>>> I would envision that I would setup
On Jun 9, 2009, at 1:17 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Dream feature: having a button on the trac ticket web page that
>>> would
>>> run this script on sage.math (don't know if this is easily doable
>>> though).
>>
>> I would envision that I would setup an always-running script on
>> sage.
2009/6/9 William Stein :
>
> 2009/6/8 Nicolas M. Thiery :
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:32:34AM -0700, William Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:35 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> > Come on, guys; is it really so hard to run "sage -docbuild reference
>>> >> > html" and check the o
2009/6/8 Nicolas M. Thiery :
>
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:32:34AM -0700, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:35 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>> >
>> >> > Come on, guys; is it really so hard to run "sage -docbuild reference
>> >> > html" and check the output before you submit (or give a p
William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:35 AM, kcrisman wrote:
Come on, guys; is it really so hard to run "sage -docbuild reference
html" and check the output before you submit (or give a positive
review to) a patch?
\end{grumble}
>>> I've added this to the patch revie
Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:32:34AM -0700, William Stein wrote:
>> There's interest in creating a function in Sage that will apply the
>> patches from a given trac ticket, run all tests, verify that the docs
>> don't break, and report the result. The idea is that this
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:32:34AM -0700, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:35 AM, kcrisman wrote:
> >
> >> > Come on, guys; is it really so hard to run "sage -docbuild reference
> >> > html" and check the output before you submit (or give a positive
> >> > review to) a patch?
>
> In the meantime, can someone cut an alpha0 for Mac OS X 10.5?
> (Preferably just tar.gz, not dmg.) Also, is such a thing done via
> just sage -bdist?
For anyone interested, I built a dmg and it is available at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/ncalexan/sage-4.0.1.alpha0-i386-Darwin.dmg
Ho
On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 at 10:00PM -0700, Nick Alexander wrote:
> On IRC tonight three different people were looking for binaries -- one
> Mac, one linux, one T2 (?) user. I know William builds a lot of
> binaries automatically. Is it possible to make this more automatic,
> so the mythical rele
Hi Nick,
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:00 AM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
> In the meantime, can someone cut an alpha0 for Mac OS X 10.5?
> (Preferably just tar.gz, not dmg.) Also, is such a thing done via
> just sage -bdist?
Not quite. After successfully compiling from source, you then issue
these
On 1-Jun-09, at 9:32 AM, Mike Hansen wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sage 4.0.1.alpha has been released. This should hopefully take care
> of
> the rest of the fallout from the switch to Pynac. The tarball can be
> found at
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/sage-4.0.1.alpha0.tar
On IRC
On Jun 1, 2009, at 09:32 , Mike Hansen wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sage 4.0.1.alpha has been released. This should hopefully take care
> of
> the rest of the fallout from the switch to Pynac. The tarball can be
> found at
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/sage-4.0.1.alpha0.tar
>
> a
On Jun 2, 7:59 am, davidloeffler wrote:
> \begin{grumble}
>
> For me, 4.0.1.alpha0 builds successfully on 32-bit Linux (upgrading
> from 4.0). But there are a bunch of errors building the reference
> manual, coming from sage.combinat.backtrack.SearchForest. This is
> rather frustrating given th
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:35 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>> > Come on, guys; is it really so hard to run "sage -docbuild reference
>> > html" and check the output before you submit (or give a positive
>> > review to) a patch?
>>
>> > \end{grumble}
>>
>> I've added this to the patch review guidelines:
>>
On Jun 2, 9:06 am, John Cremona wrote:
> 2009/6/2 davidloeffler :
>
> > What does force a complete rebuild is making a new branch with "sage -
> > clone". This is annoying; I don't know enough about the build
> > machinery to know if this can be changed.
>
> I agree. If I have built the docs in
2009/6/2 davidloeffler :
>
> On Jun 2, 4:35 pm, kcrisman wrote:
>>
>> Though I'll point out, for the sake of argument, that some of us have
>> such underpowered computers that even running full doctests is not
>> practical (i.e. everything times out), and given how long it takes to
>> build the d
On Jun 2, 4:35 pm, kcrisman wrote:
>
> Though I'll point out, for the sake of argument, that some of us have
> such underpowered computers that even running full doctests is not
> practical (i.e. everything times out), and given how long it takes to
> build the documentation whenever I even upgra
> > Come on, guys; is it really so hard to run "sage -docbuild reference
> > html" and check the output before you submit (or give a positive
> > review to) a patch?
>
> > \end{grumble}
>
> I've added this to the patch review guidelines:
>
> http://wiki.sagemath.org/TracGuidelines#ReviewingPatches
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:59 AM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> \begin{grumble}
>
> For me, 4.0.1.alpha0 builds successfully on 32-bit Linux (upgrading
> from 4.0). But there are a bunch of errors building the reference
> manual, coming from sage.combinat.backtrack.SearchForest. This is
> rather frustra
\begin{grumble}
For me, 4.0.1.alpha0 builds successfully on 32-bit Linux (upgrading
from 4.0). But there are a bunch of errors building the reference
manual, coming from sage.combinat.backtrack.SearchForest. This is
rather frustrating given the hours of work I put in to making sure the
4.0 docs b
William Stein wrote:
> Mike wisely removed the README.txt from spkg/standard/, since it was
> just an out of date version of the README in SAGE_ROOT. I've just put
> back a simple 1-linear README.txt in spkg/standard/ (in mike's
> account). Can you try the upgrade again?
>
On Fedora 9, 32 bit
Hi Vlad,
I've had similar problems with compiling sage-4.0 using gcc 4.4.0 in
archlinux. I had to downgrade my gcc to 4.3.3, and now sage is
compiling fine.
Best,
Alex
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:55 PM, prhlava wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
>> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/sage-4.0.1.alp
For some reason, it now seems very difficult to quit the notebook with
4.0.1.alpha:
^C2009-06-02 07:17:02-0500 [-] Saving notebook...
^C2009-06-02 07:20:20-0500 [-] Saving notebook...
^C^C
...usually I just have to wait a few seconds.
-Marshall
On Jun 1, 11:32 am, Mike Hansen wrote:
> Hello,
Hello,
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/sage-4.0.1.alpha0.tar
I have tried to compile this under ArchLinux (32 bit) with:
gcc (GCC) 4.4.0 20090526 (prerelease)
glibc 2.10.1-2
And the compilation stops with error in singular:
make install in kernel
make[4]: Entering directory `
I got one failure on an intel mac (10.5):
sage -t "devel/sage/sage/misc/html.py"
**
File "/Users/mh/sagestuff/wsage3/devel/sage/sage/misc/html.py", line
157:
sage: html.table([(i, j, i == j) for i in [0..1] for j in [0..1]])
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 1:52 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> On Jun 1, 9:32 am, Mike Hansen wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Sage 4.0.1.alpha has been released. This should hopefully take care of
>> the rest of the fallout from the switch to Pynac. The tarball can be
>> found at
>>
>> http://sage.math.was
Built from scratch ok + all tests passed on 32-bit Ubuntu and on 64-bit ubuntu.
John
2009/6/1 Mike Hansen :
>
> Hello,
>
> Sage 4.0.1.alpha has been released. This should hopefully take care of
> the rest of the fallout from the switch to Pynac. The tarball can be
> found at
>
> http://sage.ma
John H Palmieri wrote:
> On Jun 1, 9:32 am, Mike Hansen wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Sage 4.0.1.alpha has been released. This should hopefully take care of
>> the rest of the fallout from the switch to Pynac. The tarball can be
>> found at
>>
>> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/sage-4.0.1
On Jun 1, 9:32 am, Mike Hansen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Sage 4.0.1.alpha has been released. This should hopefully take care of
> the rest of the fallout from the switch to Pynac. The tarball can be
> found at
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/sage-4.0.1.alpha0.tar
>
> and a copy of it
33 matches
Mail list logo
