[sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

> *Is this selective activation possible?* No! Activating the *labelled trigger* effects all state and priority labels. Even if restriced to the label s: needs review it could be affected by the GitHub bug, since the bot will remove a previously selected state label. > *Sorry. This one is

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

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 12:09:54 PM UTC-8 Matthias Koeppe wrote: Prompted by the discussion of space use on the *local machines* of users and developers, I propose another item in addition to A and B: *C. Advertise use of "git worktree" and recommend symlinking the "upstream"

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

On 20 February 2024 22:44:02 GMT, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 12:45:25 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 8:13 PM Matthias Koeppe >wrote: > >I have been doing the vast majority of this maintenance work in the past 4 >years, and I have

[sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

If a draft is marked as *ready for review* the s: needs review label is added. Activate immediately. Sorry. This one is also affected by the github bug. Right? If so, not activate. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To

[sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

On Wednesday, February 21, 2024 at 3:11:14 AM UTC+9 seb@gmail.com wrote: This is currently not implemented, but of course possible. But the converse can be activated immediately: If a user converts a ready PR to a draft, all status labels will be removed. Do not activate because of

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

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 1:08:44 PM UTC-8 Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 12:46:01 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: I don't think the docs describe the interaction between package-version.txt and install-requires.txt (and between potential version constraints in

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

On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 12:45:25 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 8:13 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: I have been doing the vast majority of this maintenance work in the past 4 years, and I have been improving the tooling to reduce the workload associated with it --

Re: [sage-devel] Need advice on PR attempting to modify coercion for Python int type

To follow up on this, with a few more tweaks I have all the CI passing. If a coercion expert wants to review the PR I would appreciate that, but I'm hopeful that this change is a net positive for sagemath. On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 2:53:26 PM UTC Giacomo Pope wrote: > Yes, I tried

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

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 8:13 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 11:43:07 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On 20 February 2024 17:28:31 GMT, Matthias Koeppe > wrote: > >On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:43:27 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >The number of

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

On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 11:43:07 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: On 20 February 2024 17:28:31 GMT, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:43:27 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: >The number of dependencies has grown to the point it has gotten too hard to >maintain,

[sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

It must be done by a maintainer of the repository (see the desription of SYNC_LABELS_IGNORE_EVENTS in #35172 ). However, the restriction regarding the error in the web interface must then be accepted. Matthias Koeppe schrieb am

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

On 20 February 2024 17:28:31 GMT, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:43:27 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >The number of dependencies has grown to the point it has gotten too hard to >maintain, > > >No. It's easier than it has ever been in the past because of our

[sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 10:11:14 AM UTC-8 seb@gmail.com wrote: can be activated immediately: If a user converts a ready PR to a draft, all status labels will be removed. If a draft is marked as *ready for review* the s: needs review label is added. Also implemented (but not

[sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

This is currently not implemented, but of course possible. But the converse can be activated immediately: If a user converts a ready PR to a draft, all status labels will be removed. If a draft is marked as *ready for review* the s: needs review label is added. Also implemented (but not

Re: [sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

The bot uses gh edit to manipulate the labels (see the code here ). AFAIR I also tried with gh api leading to the same behavior in the web interface. In principle these commands work,

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

On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:43:27 AM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: The number of dependencies has grown to the point it has gotten too hard to maintain, No. It's easier than it has ever been in the past because of our improved tooling. especially if one aims to support as many Python

Re: [sage-devel] Need advice on PR attempting to modify coercion for Python int type

Yes, I tried locally and although the little example for elliptic curves works and shows a "fixed" issue with multiplication by an int, several new multiplications fail. Picking one of these tests at random (the whole logos failure is 40Mb!!) I think I have identified one of the issues.

Re: [sage-devel] Need advice on PR attempting to modify coercion for Python int type

Did you try running tests locally? Our CI sometimes acts up On 20 February 2024 12:49:03 GMT, Giacomo Pope wrote: >Hey all, > >I have been trying to work on a fix for scalar multiplication of points on >elliptic curves over finite fields. The issue at the moment is that when we >multiply by a

[sage-devel] Need advice on PR attempting to modify coercion for Python int type

Hey all, I have been trying to work on a fix for scalar multiplication of points on elliptic curves over finite fields. The issue at the moment is that when we multiply by a Sage type, such as an Integer, the coercion system discovers the action via `_acted_upon_` and a fast method via Pari

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

On 20 February 2024 01:57:40 GMT, Nathan Dunfield wrote: >On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 3:08:54 PM UTC-6 John H Palmieri wrote, >responding to Dima: > >You said: "The difference between wheel packages vs pip packages is that >the latter don't require pre-fetched wheels, and absence of the