[sage-devel] Re: [Proposal] allow standard packages to be pip packages, reduce source tarball size

2024-02-12 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
+1 for both proposals. Via "pip download" (https://pip.pypa.io/en/stable/cli/pip_download/) it is easy to resolve and download all pip packages on a system with internet connection, and then later on the target system install it without the need for internet. On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 9

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [Proposal] allow standard packages to be pip packages, reduce source tarball size

2024-02-19 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
This discussion about the need to fix the version of pytest *and its runtime dependencies* is almost comical. We are installing and running pytest successfully since 3 years without any version requirement via pip in ci and experienced zero issues. We are also not alone in that. For example, sc

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal: Make pytest, pytest_xdist, pytest_mock, python_build standard packages

2024-02-19 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
+1 for the one-line change of the type from "optional" to "standard". -1 on everything ("standard pip" or "standard wheel") that involves an unnecessary version constraint and an explicit declaration of the runtime dependencies. On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 4:51:45 PM UTC+8 Dima Pasechni

[sage-devel] Re: Unload "blocker" label

2024-02-25 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Just move "usage 2" to a new label. Would be more intuitive and explicit in my opinion. On Monday, February 26, 2024 at 1:25:34 PM UTC+8 Kwankyu Lee wrote: > Hi > > "blocker" label is overloaded too much. It is used for > > usage 1: PRs that should be merged to the next release > usage 2: PRs th

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage's Code of Conduct: proposed changes

2024-03-04 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
I think Martin raises important points and agree that 0-4 should be added to the code of conduct (more in spirit than in this particular formulation; for example, I like the proposed reformulations of David). Point 5 is important as well, but I would say it's enough to spell out the rules gover

Re: [sage-devel] Urgent: Please vote on these "disputed" PRs

2024-04-10 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
> 4. Please vote -1 on https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36580, https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36753, and https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37138, which attempt to obstruct the modularization project and the mechanism for the distribution on PyPI. Please refrain from such unfoun

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposal (redo): Make python_build (and its dependency pyproject_hooks) a standard package

2024-04-14 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
-1 The usage of "setup.py sdist" or "setup.py bdist_wheel" only happens in certain edge cases (e.g. the almost un-documented `--enable-wheels` option) and in these cases it is no problem to require developers to run `pip install build` beforehand. So these last remaining instances of calling "

[sage-devel] Re: Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

2024-04-23 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
In reply to the comment (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-2067371677) >> My fear would be that at some point there is a request not to use symbolics in some module, because Lisp is hard to install on some system. >That should not happen. Modularization is downstream to

[sage-devel] Re: CI Is (Generally) Broken

2024-05-19 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
I've now set https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37998 back to "need work" for the following reasons: - Needs to be tested on all 6 os/python version combinations - Updates of the conda lock files should never require additions to the "known bugs" exclusions. If a certain version upgrade result

[sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-08-21 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
> the version constraints of the packages that happen to be build dependencies of the Sage library (enumerated in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/develop/bootstrap#L36) are set in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/develop/src/pyproject.toml#L3 Right (adhering to the standard of moder

[sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-08-22 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
People interested in maintaining sagelib should only care about the version constraint in the pyproject.toml file (e.g. if they decide that a new feature of numpy is needed, then the version constraint of numpy should be changed accordingly). People interested in maintaining sage-the-distro sho

[sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-08-23 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Why would one want to specify a more narrow version range? That would only impose unnecessary constraints on downstream packaging efforts. Another example: https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38556 On Thursday, August 22, 2024 at 8:32:02 PM UTC+2 Matthias Koeppe wrote: > On Thursday, August 2

[sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-09-05 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
@Kwankyu, replying here to your comments. The cython constraint in scipy is for build-time. Sagelib only cares about the fact that scipy is installed in the same venv, not how you install or build it. In fact, pip uses build isolation by default, or you may install scipy using the prebuilt whee

[sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-09-06 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Moreover, there is actually a very simple way to specify a different constraint for sage-the-distro: just remove the auto-gen of the version-requirements file, and provide an own one for sage-the-distro. That way was discussed in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37902#discussion_r174489

[sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-09-09 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
The PR does not include any explanation as to why the changes to pyproject.toml are necessary, nor does it provide any guidance on how to test them. I used the standard configure process (now also with the system-site-packages switch) followed by make, both with and without these changes, an

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [debian-science] Modularized sagemath packages: proof of concept

2024-10-09 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Currently, when you try to package sage on a new distro, you need to have all dependencies installed before you can even explore building sage. The modularization effort could be helpful in this regard, because it enables a more incremental approach where you first package a smaller subset of th

[sage-devel] Re: Using Sage on Windows

2024-10-16 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
I'm very happy to see improvements to the Windows installation. I don't have the time right now to try your powershell script, but it looks like a nice walk-through for not-so-technical users. Do you want to add it to the docs? Another alternative would be to import the docker image as a WSL d

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-09-22 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Michael, to make things short: The discussion is around these changes to the `pyproject.toml` file https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38227/files#diff-0acbedc0b174ebec342997fdca9442a5486917ab04644da866213e97d2543604 which he claims harmonize the constraints with scipy (although scipy actual

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Package upgrade PRs waiting for review

2024-09-23 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Thanks, that's helpful! On Monday, September 23, 2024 at 8:34:26 PM UTC+8 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On Sun, 2024-09-22 at 20:05 -0700, 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel > wrote: > > Michael, to make things short: The discussion is around these changes to &g

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [debian-science] Modularized sagemath packages: proof of concept

2024-11-19 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
The new version of cysignals, released just a couple of hours ago, now builds using Meson and works fine on Windows. Thanks Dima and Frédéric for the quick reviews and the new release! At the moment, we don't provide wheels for windows but this can be added if it's a hard requirement for you or

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [debian-science] Modularized sagemath packages: proof of concept

2024-11-20 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
I don't understand what you are saying. When you say "works on Windows" do you mean that the build works? I am certain that sig_on and sig_off do not work on Windows if you have not added any Windows-specific signal handling. Yes, the build works on Windows as well as all tests are passing

Re: [sage-devel] attempting to finish PR with flaky CI tests

2025-01-31 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
+1 on disabling all doctests that randomly fail. https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39100 might be helpful in discovering these flaky tests. Do you also want to disable CI workflows that sometimes fail for intrinsic reasons? For example, the Build & Test workflow often fails to push the tem

Re: [sage-devel] attempting to finish PR with flaky CI tests

2025-02-04 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
> I suggest to make the checks information only; the check report failed step, but the check itself passes always. I don't think this is a good idea. If some tests fail randomly, then that's an issue with the test and not with the "engine". Just fix the test or, if that's too much work for now

Re: [sage-devel] are there recommended programming environments for beginners?

2025-01-08 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
As with many such choices, the decision is subjective. However, I highly recommend VS Code. It starts as a lightweight editor but can become quite powerful as you explore its features further. For the workshop, you might find Codespaces particularly useful. This feature allows you to edit an

[sage-devel] Re: meson build doesn't find cysignals?

2025-01-01 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Can you please also post the output of /home/grhkm/git/sage/build/cp311/meson-logs Does `import cysignals.signals` from python in the activated conda env work? On Wednesday, January 1, 2025 at 6:08:04 PM UTC+8 grh...@gmail.com wrote: > I am trying to use the `meson` build method instead of cond

Re: [sage-devel] Re: meson build doesn't find cysignals?

2025-01-05 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
ignals` works in the conda python. I guess > because > it's installed in `$CONDA_PREFIX/lib/python3.11/site-packages`. > > On 1/1/25 7:29 PM, 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel wrote: > > Can you please also post the output of > /home/grhkm/git/sage/build/cp31

Re: [sage-devel] Re: GSoC 2025 Ideas

2025-02-19 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
I couldn't find a way to register to this wiki, so could someone please update the page with the following info? Thanks! (Maybe for next time use https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki) Project: Lie group actions on manifolds Mentor: Tobias Diez, Erik? Area: Differential Geometry Skills: Knowl

Re: [sage-devel] PROPOSAL: remove python3 spkg from Sage

2025-04-05 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
What are good criteria for evaluating different ways to install Python? - Reliability - Installation speed - Disk space used after installation - Ease of use for end users - Suitability for distributions - Suitability for the macO

[sage-devel] Re: How do we use uv (the software)?

2025-04-08 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
There is no real roadmap. The low-hanging fruit is to replace all `pip install` in CI with uv to make use of the lock file mechanism. Moreover, I could imagine the following aim for installing sage from source (without using conda): 1) Install all system packages 2) Run `uv sync` to build (and i

Re: [sage-devel] SageMath Now Supports Meson – Faster and More Efficient Builds!

2025-04-04 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
E.g., there are many packages in Sage that use > autotools -- does this mean that all of them have a non-autotools > build process as well now? > > Thanks for whatever quick context you can easily provide, > > William > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 3:47 AM 'tobia...@gmx.

[sage-devel] SageMath Now Supports Meson – Faster and More Efficient Builds!

2025-04-03 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Dear developers, I am excited to announce that SageMath now supports the Meson build system! This modern alternative to Autotools brings several key advantages: - *Faster Builds* – Meson significantly reduces configuration and compilation time due to better parallelism (some benchmark

Re: [sage-devel] PROPOSAL: remove python3 spkg from Sage

2025-04-02 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Sounds like a good idea. Installing a specific version of Python nowadays is easy enough and there a few tools that make this experience as smooth as possible. For example, uv uses prebuild pythons for many OS to speed up the installation and to reduce the risk of build errors (see https://gith

Re: [sage-devel] PROPOSAL: remove python3 spkg from Sage

2025-04-10 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
With all non-python pre-reqs in place, just run./bootstrap and pip to build sagelib, that's all. No need to worry about a dodgy custom venv, unhappy ./configure, etc. > Interesting, where can I find a list of the non-python pre-reqs? https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/871ba9daed15374

Re: [sage-devel] PROPOSAL: remove python3 spkg from Sage

2025-04-12 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
Marc, what is your opinion about replacing "building from source" in the Python spkg by "installing the prebuild pythons from astral/python-build-standalone"? Would this work for the MacOS app; and if not why? Other popular projects, like anki and influxdb, seem to use these builds for their e

Re: [sage-devel] PROPOSAL: remove python3 spkg from Sage

2025-04-20 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
On Saturday, April 19, 2025 at 7:12:16 AM UTC+8 Nils Bruin wrote: So a middle ground would be to offer a security blanket during the transition: change the default behaviour of the python package for now to NOT build, but as a transition measure offer a configuration flag that restores the abil

[sage-devel] Re: role of file Pipfile

2025-04-30 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
I'd already removed this in a merged PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39031. No idea why this file is now back. Feel free to open another PR deleting it again ;-) On Wednesday, April 30, 2025 at 8:06:39 PM UTC+8 David Coudert wrote: > I see that a file named Pipfile is generated when bu

Re: [sage-devel] Conda based development: rebuild instructions

2025-04-24 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
The docs for conda are outdated (there is already a PR in the pipeline fixing this). Please use meson following https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/installation/meson.html On Friday, April 25, 2025 at 5:46:15 AM UTC+8 dim...@gmail.com wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 4:35 PM Nils Bruin wrote: > >

Re: [sage-devel] C++ Error building Sage

2025-05-01 Thread 'tobia...@gmx.de' via sage-devel
That's probably due to a recent clang. Should be fixed by https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39526 in the develop branch. On Thursday, May 1, 2025 at 11:22:41 PM UTC+8 dim...@gmail.com wrote: > It's hard to tell, but does your environment use Apple's toolchain, or > Conda toolchain. > Could