Hello all,
In order to keep distributions happy, I managed to do the PARI upgrade
in such a way that compatibility with PARI-2.9.3 will remain.
I specifically created a new ticket
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23796 for this. After this ticket, the
only doctest failures with PARI master a
On 2017-09-06 17:28, Ximin Luo wrote:
If there is no "normalise" function for that context, perhaps there is at least
a method to check that two objects represent the same mathematical group, so:
I sort of agree in principle, but this is easier said than done. In many
cases, the mathematics i
On 06/09/2017 10:28, Ximin Luo wrote:
Jeroen Demeyer:
On 2017-09-06 14:53, Ximin Luo wrote:
I've seen numerous cases where Sage has to change the expected test output
simply because a dependency was upgraded. There has to be a more sustainable
way of achieving this...
Suggestions welcome...
Jeroen Demeyer:
> On 2017-09-06 14:53, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> I've seen numerous cases where Sage has to change the expected test output
>> simply because a dependency was upgraded. There has to be a more sustainable
>> way of achieving this...
>
> Suggestions welcome...
>
> Note that none of your
On 6 September 2017 at 12:48, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2017-07-25 22:16, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>>
>> Hello sage-devel and sage-packaging,
>>
>> I propose to upgrade the PARI package to the git master version instead
>> of the current released version.
>
>
> Now that the cypari2 upgrade has been
On 2017-07-25 22:16, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
Hello sage-devel and sage-packaging,
I propose to upgrade the PARI package to the git master version instead
of the current released version.
Now that the cypari2 upgrade has been merged, I am working on this.
Thanks to the new cypari2, *building* Sa
On 27 July 2017 at 10:01, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2017-07-26 00:46, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote:
>
>> Would it be worth creating a fork of PARI
>>
>
> What *exactly* do you mean with that?
>
> I feel like "fork" is just a word and you can already consider the
> PARI-in-Sage t
On 2017-07-26 00:46, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote:
Would it be worth creating a fork of PARI
What *exactly* do you mean with that?
I feel like "fork" is just a word and you can already consider the
PARI-in-Sage to be a fork of PARI.
you would avoid the problems of a distri
On 25 Jul 2017 21:16, "Jeroen Demeyer" wrote:
>
> Hello sage-devel and sage-packaging,
>
> I propose to upgrade the PARI package to the git master version instead
of the current released version.
>
>
> A second motivation is that stable releases of PARI are very slow. The
most recent stable PARI r
I just created two tickets:
- https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23543 for upgrading to the latest
official bugfix release
- https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23544 for upgrading to git master
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsu
On 2017-07-25 22:28, William Stein wrote:
+1 -- there were a lot of people at Sage Days last week asking about
feasibility of making a Pari-master package,
since pari stable is so old, and they really needed things in the newers
version of Pari.
Interesting. Do you happen to know which features
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 1:16 PM Jeroen Demeyer
wrote:
> Hello sage-devel and sage-packaging,
>
> I propose to upgrade the PARI package to the git master version instead
> of the current released version.
>
> The main motivation for me is to use the new plotting engine for the
> PARI Jupyter kerne
Hello sage-devel and sage-packaging,
I propose to upgrade the PARI package to the git master version instead
of the current released version.
The main motivation for me is to use the new plotting engine for the
PARI Jupyter kernel. The plotting engine has changed a lot since the
stable relea
13 matches
Mail list logo
