Relevant to both the overall issue of project direction *and* the specific
one about Sage-as-distribution, I would just add keeping in mind the Sage
mission (at least, as it currently stands):
Mission: *Creating a viable free open source alternative to Magma, Maple,
Mathematica and Matlab*.
We are discussing shortcomings of a huge mono-repo which only keeps growing.
GitHub's idea that you release a whole repo makes it quite impossible to
release parts of Sage without a lockstep. While back in 2021 we haven't quite
realised this, it's becoming clear now.
The issue #36803 is an
In the discussion in one of the PRs linked here, we have identified a
separate issue.
The SageMath project has a high complexity, which can be overwhelming to
some.
As part of our goal to make the Sage development community more inclusive,
we should expand the developer's guide with
On Thursday, November 30, 2023 at 3:14:57 PM UTC-8 kcrisman wrote:
This is a good place to thank embray and darthandrus (among many others)
for work on previous Windows and Mac "one-click" download options, and
especially the 3-manifolds project for the current one for Mac.
+1
--
You
To the extent that this specific PR is emblematic of a particular approach
to Sage development (a flawed approach in Dima's view, if I understand
right), then the whole approach should be discussed here. Probably many of
these issues in Sage development have been discussed already, but it's
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 10:12 AM tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
> At first I was very enthusiastic about this proposed policy, but after
> thinking about this for a bit I'm no longer convinced this is a good idea.
>
> First of all, the policy sets out to solve the case "where there is a
> general
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 12:37 PM John H Palmieri
wrote:
> To the extent that this specific PR is emblematic of a particular approach
> to Sage development (a flawed approach in Dima's view, if I understand
> right), then the whole approach should be discussed here. Probably many of
> these
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:02 PM David Roe wrote:
>
> Let's try to focus on the policy proposal, rather than specific disagreements
> on individual PRs.
The whole thing about specific disagreements on individual PRs comes
exactly from the wrong overall direction of the project.
Which replaced,
Let's try to focus on the policy proposal, rather than specific
disagreements on individual PRs.
Dima, I'm sorry that you're feeling frustrated with the whole process. It
may be helpful to have additional directions about the overall strategy for
Sage's build system, but that's better put off to
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 9:25 PM Kwankyu Lee wrote:
>
> Meanwhile, Matthias and Dima spent lots of mental energy to produce a prime
> example showing why we need the policy:
>
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36726
>
> Please come down from sun-shining deck to the murky bottom of our ship
10 matches
Mail list logo
