On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:27, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>>> Robert Bradshaw writes:
But yes, this sounds like a great idea! So the
collection of .ebuild files (and their suppor
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:27, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>>> But yes, this sounds like a great idea! So the
>>> collection of .ebuild files (and their supporting patches, etc.) is in
>>> the Sage repository, but period
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>>> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>>> In the category of "glue code" I meant to include everything in
>>> $SAGE_LOCAL/bin/sage-*. I see much of that stuff as more relat
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>>> But considering that we might one day want to make part of the Sage
>>> library possible to install into your system Python distribution
>>> (right?), it might be a good idea to keep it separate from the
>>> "infras
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:32 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>>> Well, considering among other things the recent discussions about
>>> licensing, I don't think that it's going to be possible to have a single
>>> top-level repository for all Sage code.
>>
>> But for everything not
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Jason Grout
>> wrote:
>>> You correctly interpreted my response, and I agree with your conclusions. I
>>> haven't used the sage branch-handling code in years.
>>
>> I used them e
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> A personal anecdote: I've used sage for about 4 years, but only started
> contributing in the last couple of months because the development process
> looks scary to an outsider.
>
> When I started, at every step of the process, I already kn
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 2/9/12 4:28 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>> I think if we could get rid of a few magic commands in favor of 'mv',
>> 'cp', and 'ln', it would make the process seem less daunting.
>
>
> +1. And then the new user that is learning how to do sa
On 02/09/2012 04:18 PM, kcrisman wrote:
I think you are totally missing the point. To a newbie who has heard
of the following:
cd
mv
hg
ln
you are right. My assumption is that we would like to be as inviting
as possible to those who have not. (And they are legion; think of the
Windows world
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 2/9/12 9:44 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 23:30, Jason Grout
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I use separate directories in devel/ to have multiple versions of the new
>>> sage notebook installed. They're almost all git repositories,
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 00:51, kcrisman wrote:
> I think it's great that we've made the updates to the developer guide
> that explain queues, and I have been using them a lot more for the
> last year or so. But remember, a lot of the infrastructure was put in
> place in order to aid new developer
People are answering the question I intended to ask. So far no-one
uses the branching mechanism. Who knows if it still worksif it
doesn't someone should remove mention of it from the docs.
John
On 9 February 2012 15:53, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 2/9/12 9:44 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>>
>> On Th
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 23:30, Jason Grout wrote:
> I use separate directories in devel/ to have multiple versions of the new
> sage notebook installed. They're almost all git repositories, though :). I
> don't know if that counts as a yes or no to your question.
IMO it's important to note that
On Feb 9, 2012 7:01 AM, "John Cremona" wrote:
>
> Does anyone still use branches?
I haven't in years!
>I used to always do a "sage -clone"
> right after building a test version, but since using queues I never do
> that. If I need to test something which affects more than the Sage
> library, not
Does anyone still use branches? I used to always do a "sage -clone"
right after building a test version, but since using queues I never do
that. If I need to test something which affects more than the Sage
library, notably a new version of an spkg, I just copy the entire
build using cp -r, and wo
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 01:45, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>> My $0.02.
>
> I disagree with what you wrote above. Perhaps you have a different
> impression than me of how Mercurial is used, given the relative sizes
> of our contributions to the Sage l
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Sorry, I managed to activate some button on Google Groups accidentally and
> prematurely post the above message...
>
> +100. Our main problem with Mercurial is that we are not *using* it. We are
> just using Mercurial as a way for Jeroen to gene
Done!
-Keshav
Join us in #sagemath on irc.freenode.net !
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sag
> +100. Our main problem with Mercurial is that we are not *using* it. We
> are just using Mercurial as a way for Jeroen to generate changelogs, and no
> other collaborative purpose whatsoever (despite what individual developers
> such as William might be doing with qfinishing patches, committing,
On 2012-02-07 21:08, William Stein wrote:
> What I'm suggesting is that the script that auto-adds ticket numbers
> should strip the user-added ticket number first, to avoid extensive
> duplication.
If you send me the magic sed/awk/perl/python/whatever script to do this,
I'll happily use it :-)
--
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 2/7/12 2:46 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Jason Grout
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2/7/12 2:16 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM, William Stein
wrote:
>
>
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 2/7/12 2:46 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Jason Grout
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2/7/12 2:16 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM, William Stein
wrote:
>
>
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 2/7/12 2:16 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Simon King
>>> wrote:
Hi William,
On 7 Feb., 20:47, William Stein wrote:
>
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Simon King wrote:
>> Hi William,
>>
>> On 7 Feb., 20:47, William Stein wrote:
>>> It's important (in fact, critical) that the trac ticket number is
>>> clearly available in the commit message. But having it
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Simon King wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> On 7 Feb., 20:47, William Stein wrote:
>> It's important (in fact, critical) that the trac ticket number is
>> clearly available in the commit message. But having it twice in two
>> different ways in almost every message seems
25 matches
Mail list logo
