I agree that a separate repo for SymPEPs is best.

Once 1.7 is released I can try to draft SymPEP 1 soon for discussion
here to bootstrap the process.

Oscar

On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 at 00:22, Jonathan Gutow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> +1 for a separate repo.
>
> I think that initially the default format for SymPEPs should be markdown
> as it renders well in github. Markdown has some serious limitations, so
> their may be reasons to change this later.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jonathan
>
> On 10/12/20 5:06 PM, Aaron Meurer wrote:
> > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not 
> > click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know 
> > the content is safe.
> >
> >
> > I'd like to restart discussion on SymPEPs.
> >
> > Here are the documents outlining the processes for PEPs, MEPs
> > (Matplotlib Enhancement Proposals), and NEPs (NumPy Enhancement
> > Proposals)
> >
> > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/
> > https://matplotlib.org/3.1.1/devel/MEP/template.html
> > https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0000.html
> >
> > The MEP and NEP templates are both very similar to PEPs.
> >
> > So I think we should start with SymPEP 1, which would be the outline
> > of the SymPEP process. The first meta question that needs to be
> > answered, though, is where should SymPEPs live, and where should the
> > discussions on them take place? A natural place would be the wiki, but
> > I actually think the wiki isn't the best place. The wiki doesn't have
> > any discussion features, and it also doesn't have any way to do pull
> > requests. Also the wiki allows anyone to edit it without permission,
> > which might not be what we want for SymPEPs.
> >
> > So I would suggest either including them in the main SymPy repo, or
> > creating a new SymPEPs repo for them. Any preference on which would be
> > better? I think I would prefer a separate repo, unless we want to have
> > the rendered documents included in the SymPy documentation, in which
> > case that will be easier if they are in the SymPy repo. In either
> > case, I would suggest for the discussions for any SymPEP to take place
> > on issues or pull requests on the respective repo.
> >
> > Once we decide this, we can start with an actual start for SymPEP 1
> > and the discussion of what it should look like.
> >
> > Aaron Meurer
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 2:08 PM Aaron Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I think the documentation stuff is a bit off topic here. We can
> >> improve documentation and have SymPEPs. In fact, if improving
> >> documentation requires a large concerted effort, that could itself be
> >> a SymPEP. However, I will note that on this front:
> >>
> >> - We are participating in Google Season of Docs (GSoD, not to be
> >> confused with GSoC), which is a program that pays technical writers to
> >> work on open source documentation. The GSoD results will be announced
> >> in a couple of weeks, so watch this space.
> >>
> >> - I agree that we should have a concerted effort to improve
> >> documentation. A documentation sprint is one way. Getting funding to
> >> improve things is another.
> >>
> >> - We have a documentation style guide, which was developed as part of
> >> last year's GSoD. However, only a small subset of SymPy actually
> >> conforms to the guide
> >> https://docs.sympy.org/latest/documentation-style-guide.html.
> >>
> >> Aaron Meurer
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 1:48 PM Nikhil Maan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 9:39:43 PM UTC+5:30 [email protected] 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> A nice thing for a GSoD student to do would be to organize a 
> >>>> documentation sprint.
> >>>
> >>> This sounds like a great idea.
> >>>
> >>> I also like the idea of SymPy Enhancement Proposals. Another project that 
> >>> I think might benefit SymPEPs is Naman Gera's work on adding control 
> >>> systems to SymPy. It will be a great place for folks who would like to 
> >>> help with/continue this work in the future to find the motivations and 
> >>> other details about the decision choices and future plans.
> >>>
> >>> Looking at PEP-1 and seeing a large portion of the discussion in the 
> >>> thread is regarding what kind of work should have a SymPEP and what they 
> >>> should include, I think a good starting point for SymPEP-1 will be to 
> >>> describe what are SymPEPs, why we are planning to add them, what kind of 
> >>> changes should have a SymPEP, etc. Also, I like the sound of SymEP and 
> >>> SymPEP. +1 to calling them SymPEP or SymEP instead of SEP.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Nikhil Maan
> >>>
> >>>> Jason
> >>>> moorepants.info
> >>>> +01 530-601-9791
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:32 PM Matthew Brett <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 4:10 PM David Bailey <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 06/08/2020 00:47, Nicolas Guarin wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I agree that this would be good for the project but maybe it would be 
> >>>>>> a good idea to polish the documentation a bit. Some of the pages in 
> >>>>>> the wiki are somewhat outdated and they are on the first results in a 
> >>>>>> web search.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Assuming you are talking about the user level documentation,  I very 
> >>>>>> much agree.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you look up even the simplest function - e.g. Sin[] - in 
> >>>>>> Mathematica, you get a simple explanation, some examples showing that 
> >>>>>> it can be used with real numbers, and that it 'knows' about special 
> >>>>>> arguments such as Pi/3.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It shows you the power series about zero and a plot of the function. 
> >>>>>> It also shows some properties of the function such as Sin[x] = 
> >>>>>> -Sin[-x] etc etc.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It also shows that Sin can be applied to complex arguments, or even to 
> >>>>>> matrices, and that it can be applied to a high precision floating 
> >>>>>> point number to deliver a high precision result.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That same level of detail is provided for every function - right up to 
> >>>>>> complicated functions like MeijerG. Remember that for functions such 
> >>>>>> as that, the documentation is even more important because there are 
> >>>>>> different conventions as to the order,sign, etc of the arguments.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This might appear like overkill, but it means that wherever you start 
> >>>>>> you will realise a Mathemaica function is far more than just a 
> >>>>>> numerical function. This is also true for SymPy, but the information 
> >>>>>> is harder to find. It is also easy to cut/paste from the documentation 
> >>>>>> into your own code.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Of course, the documentation is massively redundant, but I imagine 
> >>>>>> that the documentation for each function or operation would not be 
> >>>>>> written from scratch, but pulled from some kind of database of 
> >>>>>> information.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Obviously the SymPy documentation can't jump to the Mathematica 
> >>>>>> standard overnight, but maybe a student could put together some sort 
> >>>>>> of framework from which such documentation of the standard maths 
> >>>>>> functions could be generated, and start the process off - then others 
> >>>>>> could contribute information that would fit into the same scheme.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think that such documentation would make SymPy very much more 
> >>>>>> user-friendly.
> >>>>> Just to say - that the Scipy Documentation Project took Numpy from
> >>>>> fairly woeful documentation, to very good documentation, in a few
> >>>>> months, and with a fairly small budget:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://conference.scipy.org/proceedings/SciPy2008/paper_5/
> >>>>> https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6879046
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Matthew
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> >>>>> Groups "sympy" group.
> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> >>>>> an email to [email protected].
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAH6Pt5q%3DN_Vb0Z_yM2w8nBKwFFJu8UPBO3_A0c1UeWhAKDBX%3Dg%40mail.gmail.com.
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> >>> "sympy" group.
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> >>> email to [email protected].
> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/b977b777-52de-43af-81c9-445662ffef9bn%40googlegroups.com.
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> > "sympy" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> > email to [email protected].
> > To view this discussion on the web visit 
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAKgW%3D6K114c9mbhXLVru4HCVB_M_-4wLdf7pHnz-ceHm97gAiQ%40mail.gmail.com.
>
> --
> Dr. Jonathan Gutow
> Chemistry Department
> UW Oshkosh
> web: https://uwosh.edu/facstaff/gutow
> e-mail: [email protected]
> Ph: 920-424-1326
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "sympy" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/680e649c-f869-dcb4-f17f-7f5e977a17cd%40uwosh.edu.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAHVvXxSPaDVXym6wxKAAZBSfM48DATjkHYi2kHLh5uLY24c3qQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to