[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Kwankyu Lee]

Voting is closed. Thanks for those who gave attention and voted.

0 clear positive (+1) votes
4 clear negative (-1) votes  

Hence my proposal is rejected. 

Other remarks:

- Dima's proposal ("grave" instead of "critical")  is something to consider 
if this proposal was accepted. 
- Sorry to those who felt that there was not enough discussion before this 
voting opened.

Let's now move and focus on other more important votings that are going on! 

Kwankyu






-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/dbb13f9f-00e0-4bfb-9581-0feffdc29c98n%40googlegroups.com.

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Matthias Koeppe]

-1 

For the most part, because this proposed policy cannot be reflected in the 
GitHub user interface: 
The list of selectable labels in the drop down menu cannot depend on 
whether it's an Issue or a PR.

Matthias

On Tuesday, February 27, 2024 at 10:45:03 PM UTC-8 Kwankyu Lee wrote:

> Hi, 
>
> Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal, 
> since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting 
> for 
>
> Proposal: 
>
> 1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay the 
> release.
> 2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue.
> 3. A PR fixing the "critical" Issue will likely get the "blocker" label.
> 4. Old Issues converted from trac with "critical" label will get the 
> "major" label instead. 
>
> Voting will end when there is no new vote for a week.
>
> This is a simple majority voting (following the standard on sage-devel 
> proposal)!
>
> A positive vote is for all parts of the Proposal. So if you do not like 
> any of (1) -- (4), cast a negative vote (-1).
>
>
> Happy voting! 
>

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/4c3cb94a-10b2-470b-9e42-0661548f4f67n%40googlegroups.com.

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[kcrisman]

On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 at 1:45:03 AM UTC-5 Kwankyu Lee wrote:

Hi, 

Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal, 
since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting 
for 

Proposal: 

1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay the 
release.
2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue.


I appreciate the spirit of this request, but since Trac did not distinguish 
between issues and PRs and we used blocker regularly on Trac, it seems like 
a pretty big change, and sort of implies you can't block a release (in 
principle) even with some big problem if you can't contribute a fix 
immediately. -1 for now.

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/255e9f64-9bd5-468c-b8e3-0d56ea2aa00an%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Vincent Delecroix]

On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 01:49, Kwankyu Lee  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 8:35:24 AM UTC+9 Marc Culler wrote:
>
> I have a proposal: It should be forbidden to call for a vote on a proposal 
> before there has been a discussion.
>
>
> Sorry if it was not clear to you, but the discussion before this vote is here:
>
> https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/uWHaWK7b6H4

>From my point of view, the discussion that happened in the linked
thread has few to do from (1)+(2)+(3) of Marc's proposal (that I
approve very much!). It contains a lot of controversy and you did
write "Anyway, as there are only objections here, I give up.". You
then launched this vote thread 2 days after while the discussion was
still going on in the first one. Notice that the discussion that
happened in the linked thread has very few to do with the vote
proposal that you made here. Your proposal was never introduced as a
proposal open to amendment but only as a vote.

To me this call to vote is premature and for this reason I vote negatively (-1).

Vincent

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAGEwAAnNd1%3DVLQfYHBGrQeMCHJ__4XnX1usujiX3dCQHK5%3DvLA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Marc Culler]

I see.  Thanks.

- Marc

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 6:49 PM Kwankyu Lee  wrote:

>
>
> On Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 8:35:24 AM UTC+9 Marc Culler wrote:
>
> I have a proposal: It should be forbidden to call for a vote on a proposal
> before there has been a discussion.
>
>
> Sorry if it was not clear to you, but the discussion before this vote is
> here:
>
> https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/uWHaWK7b6H4
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "sage-devel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sage-devel/E0qfJTMETDk/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/8e59075f-e7fa-403b-bf71-eb12fc57663en%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CALcZXREN27F4ngLLsULv9qR4%3Dwj7mhTWJDZ%2B9RsnU1AaiHPdvQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Kwankyu Lee]

On Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 8:35:24 AM UTC+9 Marc Culler wrote:

I have a proposal: It should be forbidden to call for a vote on a proposal 
before there has been a discussion.


Sorry if it was not clear to you, but the discussion before this vote is 
here:

https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/uWHaWK7b6H4 

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/8e59075f-e7fa-403b-bf71-eb12fc57663en%40googlegroups.com.

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Marc Culler]

I have a proposal: It should be forbidden to call for a vote on a proposal 
before there has been a discussion.

Without a chair, it would be impossible for this group to follow Robert's 
Rules of Order, even approximately.  But the basic process should still be 
the same. The rules are designed to allow a deliberative body to make 
progress. The steps are:
1. Somebody makes a proposal (motion).
2. Somebody else seconds the motion.  This prevents the group from wasting 
its time on a proposal supported by only one person.
3. The group discusses the proposal, perhaps amending it, usually with 
"friendly" amendments that the proposer agrees to.  The discussion makes it 
possible for the group to make an informed decision.
4. Then there is a vote.

- Marc

On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 at 12:45:03 AM UTC-6 Kwankyu Lee wrote:

> Hi, 
>
> Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal, 
> since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting 
> for 
>
> Proposal: 
>
> 1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay the 
> release.
> 2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue.
> 3. A PR fixing the "critical" Issue will likely get the "blocker" label.
> 4. Old Issues converted from trac with "critical" label will get the 
> "major" label instead. 
>
> Voting will end when there is no new vote for a week.
>
> This is a simple majority voting (following the standard on sage-devel 
> proposal)!
>
> A positive vote is for all parts of the Proposal. So if you do not like 
> any of (1) -- (4), cast a negative vote (-1).
>
>
> Happy voting! 
>

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/aef07a1c-70fa-488a-aa7e-6e1831eb2743n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Dima Pasechnik]

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 4:46 PM William Stein  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 8:39 AM Eric Gourgoulhon 
> wrote:
>
>> -1 from my side, for I think an issue can be a blocker.
>> For instance:
>> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/36914
>> This issue, which regards the use of the notebook, could not have been
>> detected by the CI framework.  It is a serious regression and definitely a
>> blocker IMHO: are we willing to release a version of SageMath that cannot
>> be used without an internet connection?
>>
>
> Related to this, do you think
>
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/34233
>
> should also be a blocker?  In Sage if you create a plot with a large
> y-axis range, the labels on the y axis are
> mathematically incorrect, which is confusing to our largest group of users
> (beginners).
>

Sure, it can be a blocker, very well (or not to overload this word, it
could be "grave" or something).


To plot it, correctly, with sympy, you need to install 3 PyPI packages into
your Python3:
matplotlib, jupyterlab, sympy.

On the other hand, check all the 400 neatly arranged Sage's spkgs, CI
passing with flying colours..
.


>
> -- William
>
>
>>
>> Eric.
>>
>> Le mercredi 28 février 2024 à 07:45:03 UTC+1, Kwankyu Lee a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal,
>>> since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting
>>> for
>>>
>>> Proposal:
>>>
>>> 1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay
>>> the release.
>>> 2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue.
>>> 3. A PR fixing the "critical" Issue will likely get the "blocker" label.
>>> 4. Old Issues converted from trac with "critical" label will get the
>>> "major" label instead.
>>>
>>> Voting will end when there is no new vote for a week.
>>>
>>> This is a simple majority voting (following the standard on sage-devel
>>> proposal)!
>>>
>>> A positive vote is for all parts of the Proposal. So if you do not like
>>> any of (1) -- (4), cast a negative vote (-1).
>>>
>>>
>>> Happy voting!
>>>
>> --
>> 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...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/a2c85e9b-ac46-49d7-8385-f568fddfa236n%40googlegroups.com
>> 
>> .
>>
>
>
> --
> William (http://wstein.org)
>
> --
> 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...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CACLE5GB7pxdZQJO7CV8YvNw3gvrVzcpv-fYXZk0YejkcXdXoxQ%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAAWYfq2uZEFfiM-cLKoFjxfkTkWhEd5S9B%3DjgZf3qxzcewR5HA%40mail.gmail.com.

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Emmanuel Charpentier]

Le mercredi 28 février 2024 à 17:39:25 UTC+1, Eric Gourgoulhon a écrit :

-1 from my side, for I think an issue can be a blocker. 
For instance:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/36914
This issue, which regards the use of the notebook, could not have been 
detected by the CI framework.  It is a serious regression and definitely a 
blocker IMHO: are we willing to release a version of SageMath that cannot 
be used without an internet connection?


Seconded. -1 from me. 

A PR fixing a blocker issue sould be an "unblocker". (Some low minds may 
think of this as what Molière would have calld "un clystère"...).

OK, I'll show myself out. Sorry...

Eric.

Le mercredi 28 février 2024 à 07:45:03 UTC+1, Kwankyu Lee a écrit :

Hi, 

Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal, 
since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting 
for 

Proposal: 

1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay the 
release.
2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue.
3. A PR fixing the "critical" Issue will likely get the "blocker" label.
4. Old Issues converted from trac with "critical" label will get the 
"major" label instead. 

Voting will end when there is no new vote for a week.

This is a simple majority voting (following the standard on sage-devel 
proposal)!

A positive vote is for all parts of the Proposal. So if you do not like any 
of (1) -- (4), cast a negative vote (-1).


Happy voting! 

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/868f9264-0d8f-4666-9786-6a535a040bffn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[William Stein]

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 8:39 AM Eric Gourgoulhon 
wrote:

> -1 from my side, for I think an issue can be a blocker.
> For instance:
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/36914
> This issue, which regards the use of the notebook, could not have been
> detected by the CI framework.  It is a serious regression and definitely a
> blocker IMHO: are we willing to release a version of SageMath that cannot
> be used without an internet connection?
>

Related to this, do you think

https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/34233

should also be a blocker?  In Sage if you create a plot with a large y-axis
range, the labels on the y axis are
mathematically incorrect, which is confusing to our largest group of users
(beginners).

-- William


>
> Eric.
>
> Le mercredi 28 février 2024 à 07:45:03 UTC+1, Kwankyu Lee a écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal,
>> since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting
>> for
>>
>> Proposal:
>>
>> 1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay the
>> release.
>> 2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue.
>> 3. A PR fixing the "critical" Issue will likely get the "blocker" label.
>> 4. Old Issues converted from trac with "critical" label will get the
>> "major" label instead.
>>
>> Voting will end when there is no new vote for a week.
>>
>> This is a simple majority voting (following the standard on sage-devel
>> proposal)!
>>
>> A positive vote is for all parts of the Proposal. So if you do not like
>> any of (1) -- (4), cast a negative vote (-1).
>>
>>
>> Happy voting!
>>
> --
> 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...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/a2c85e9b-ac46-49d7-8385-f568fddfa236n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>


-- 
William (http://wstein.org)

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CACLE5GB7pxdZQJO7CV8YvNw3gvrVzcpv-fYXZk0YejkcXdXoxQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: use "blocker" label only for PRs; use "critical" label for Issues

[Eric Gourgoulhon]

-1 from my side, for I think an issue can be a blocker. 
For instance:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/36914
This issue, which regards the use of the notebook, could not have been 
detected by the CI framework.  It is a serious regression and definitely a 
blocker IMHO: are we willing to release a version of SageMath that cannot 
be used without an internet connection?

Eric.

Le mercredi 28 février 2024 à 07:45:03 UTC+1, Kwankyu Lee a écrit :

> Hi, 
>
> Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal, 
> since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting 
> for 
>
> Proposal: 
>
> 1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay the 
> release.
> 2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue.
> 3. A PR fixing the "critical" Issue will likely get the "blocker" label.
> 4. Old Issues converted from trac with "critical" label will get the 
> "major" label instead. 
>
> Voting will end when there is no new vote for a week.
>
> This is a simple majority voting (following the standard on sage-devel 
> proposal)!
>
> A positive vote is for all parts of the Proposal. So if you do not like 
> any of (1) -- (4), cast a negative vote (-1).
>
>
> Happy voting! 
>

-- 
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...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/a2c85e9b-ac46-49d7-8385-f568fddfa236n%40googlegroups.com.