Hi SageMath Inc developers,
First there is an open problem on mathoverflow at [1]:
Conjectured Somos-like closed form of recurrences with polynomial coefficients
I would like a proof if possible.
The answer of Max Alekseyev there links to code using Groebner basis
over QQ.
If I modify the attac
But more importantly, if we disable this action, it would be a regression
for developers who cannot set labels themselves.
Isn't it enough to add "needs review" label only when draft PR is converted
to a non-draft PR? Those developers may control the draft status.
--
You received this mes
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
On Sun, Aug 4, 2024 at 9:03 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>
> In https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38219 (needs review), I propose the
> following mild policy change:
> - as a third option, a "standard" package is allowed to be a Python package
> that can be installed from platform-dependent (b
This would replace something annoying for senior developers by something
annoying for new contributors. I'm not sure if this is a good idea.
Did you have to manually resolve merge conflicts in your example? If not,
just don't push it back to the repository in such a situation in the
future. If
