On Nov 26, 12:44 am, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 25, 10:38 pm, Jason Grout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
root wrote:
Standard industry practice on half a million open source projects
does not include an I have signed over my copyright on this
particular
patch button. A general
On Nov 26, 4:36 am, Tim Lahey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
My only real concern is the specific statement about GPL V2 (or later)
in
what David wrote. While my test suite I'm licensing under BSD (which is
stated at the top of each .sage file), I'm not a fan of GPL V3, so I'd
likely
I know of no code which in Sage which is GPLv2 only. William or Michael, please
correct me if I am wrong.
I think that code which is GPLv2 (only) is not GPLv2+ compatible,
since GPL2+ says the
modifications can be released under either GPL2 or GPL3 (at your choice).
GPLv2 only restricts that
On Nov 26, 2008, at 7:42 AM, mabshoff wrote:
On Nov 26, 4:36 am, Tim Lahey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
My only real concern is the specific statement about GPL V2 (or
later)
in
what David wrote. While my test suite I'm licensing under BSD
(which is
stated at the top of each
On Nov 26, 4:43 am, David Joyner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know of no code which in Sage which is GPLv2 only. William or Michael,
please
correct me if I am wrong.
Yes, as I mentioned above there is none.
I think that code which is GPLv2 (only) is not GPLv2+ compatible,
since GPL2+ says
On Nov 26, 2008, at 8:02 AM, mabshoff wrote:
On Nov 26, 4:43 am, David Joyner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know of no code which in Sage which is GPLv2 only. William or
Michael, please
correct me if I am wrong.
Yes, as I mentioned above there is none.
I think that code which is GPLv2
On Nov 26, 4:47 am, Tim Lahey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
Nope, there isn't. We want GPL V2+ or compatible. If you prefer BSD
that if fine too, obviously. GPL V2 only code will not be merged in
the Sage library - we had that discussion a while back and all people
who submitted code
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:05 AM, Tim Lahey wrote:
I've put together a very preliminary integral testing set
...
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/48225/integral_test1.sage
It seems awkward to have to perform each integration twice:
test_int = integrand.integrate(x)
...
mx_time =
Yes, it seems better to be safe than sorry here and I think David's
suggestion is a good one. I'm not sure how vigilant people have been
about updating the author sections but that would be a good thing to
have right as well.
-M. Hampton
On Nov 26, 12:44 am, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. It is basically a contract saying that you, in exchange for
using the trac
service maintained by Sage (I used the Sage Foundation since AFAIK it is a
legal entity), agree to license your posts in a GPLv2+ compatible way
(or else mark
your post clearly as Not a contribution or Submitted on
On Nov 26, 2008, at 7:29 AM, Bill Page wrote:
It seems awkward to have to perform each integration twice:
test_int = integrand.integrate(x)
...
mx_time = timeit.eval('integrand.integrate(x)')
The first one gets the value for comparison and the second time to get
the cpu time.
Isn't
As we are now bussy discussing copyright and licence issues. (How) is
the google CLA licenced?
I.e. is it legal to make an almost litteral copy of it and use it for
sage purposes ;)
Maarten
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
Hello folks,
here goes 3.2.1.alpha2. This one should actually build out of the box.
Various setup.py issues have been fixed and the Magma doctests should
now all pass. In addition performance improvements to homespace and
integral_points have been merged. There is also the latest upstream
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 9:41 AM, koffie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As we are now bussy discussing copyright and licence issues. (How) is
the google CLA licenced?
I.e. is it legal to make an almost litteral copy of it and use it for
sage purposes ;)
There is a link at the bottom of
This line (third paragraph) needs to be changed:
You accept and agree to the following terms and conditions for Your
present and future Contributions submitted to Google. Except for the
license granted herein to Google and recipients of software
distributed by Google, You reserve all right,
Fixed now.
Thanks!
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Alfredo Portes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This line (third paragraph) needs to be changed:
You accept and agree to the following terms and conditions for Your
present and future Contributions submitted to Google. Except for the
license
mabshoff wrote:
On Nov 24, 12:31 pm, Robert Bradshaw [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Nov 24, 2008, at 9:49 AM, mabshoff wrote:
SNIP
Robert: Are you working on the updated cython.spkg or is that not on
your to do list? I am sure in that case somebody else will take care
of it.
Cython
Hi there,
what is the practice w.r.t. this kind of stuff in other big open-source
software projects? Quite honestly, I find it rather worrying that so much
legal stuff is suddenly involved in writing a simple patch. If at all
possible I would love to avoid this.
Martin
--
name: Martin
This is less than what google or sun does. However, GAP does nothing like this.
On the other hand, GAP is organized around modules (often single-authored
and sometimes with non-GPL'd licenses), with a small number of people
contributing to the kernel. I don't think Maxima does this either. But
as
David Joyner wrote:
This is less than what google or sun does. However, GAP does nothing like
this.
On the other hand, GAP is organized around modules (often single-authored
and sometimes with non-GPL'd licenses), with a small number of people
contributing to the kernel. I don't think
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Jason Grout
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Linux is a huge open-source project to which lots of huge corporations
are committing code, as well as single people. What do they do? What
about other projects that have lots of people committing code?
This OSS
There was a problem with the installation on an amd64 ubuntu 8.10:
...
building 'sage.libs.ntl.ntl_ZZ' extension
creating build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.5/sage/libs/ntl
gcc -fno-strict-aliasing -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall
-Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC
A similar thing could be http://matek.hu
Robert
I was thinking about doing something like that for some time too, though
I currently don't have time nor the skill to accomplish it.
My idea is to copy the interface of an HP50g graphing calculator, which
is pretty straightforward, with
On Nov 26, 12:56 pm, David Joyner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There was a problem with the installation on an amd64 ubuntu 8.10:
...
building 'sage.libs.ntl.ntl_ZZ' extension
creating build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.5/sage/libs/ntl
gcc -fno-strict-aliasing -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall
On Nov 26, 2008, at 10:43 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
David Joyner wrote:
This is less than what google or sun does. However, GAP does
nothing like this.
On the other hand, GAP is organized around modules (often single-
authored
and sometimes with non-GPL'd licenses), with a small number of
On Nov 26, 1:36 pm, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 26, 12:56 pm, David Joyner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There was a problem with the installation on an amd64 ubuntu 8.10:
...
building 'sage.libs.ntl.ntl_ZZ' extension
creating build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.5/sage/libs/ntl
mabshoff wrote:
Hello folks,
here goes 3.2.1.alpha2. This one should actually build out of the box.
alpha1 I hope? Else I'm not keeping up pace!
Various setup.py issues have been fixed and the Magma doctests should
now all pass. In addition performance improvements to homespace and
On Nov 26, 2:04 pm, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mabshoff wrote:
Hello folks,
here goes 3.2.1.alpha2. This one should actually build out of the box.
alpha1 I hope? Else I'm not keeping up pace!
Well, since I screwed up alpha1 there will be an alpha2 tonight.
ERROR installing
On Nov 26, 10:43 am, Jason Grout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Joyner wrote:
This is less than what google or sun does. However, GAP does nothing like
this.
On the other hand, GAP is organized around modules (often single-authored
and sometimes with non-GPL'd licenses), with a small
On 11/26/2008 08:26 AM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Martin Rubey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Lahey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
a hint: the simplification facilities in FriCAS are not extremely powerful
(because they try to be correct - in vain). The closest thing to
mabshoff wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:04 pm, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mabshoff wrote:
Hi Michael,
Hello folks,
here goes 3.2.1.alpha2. This one should actually build out of the box.
alpha1 I hope? Else I'm not keeping up pace!
Well, since I screwed up alpha1 there will be an
On Nov 26, 2:30 pm, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mabshoff wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:04 pm, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mabshoff wrote:
Hi Michael,
hi Jaap,
Hello folks,
here goes 3.2.1.alpha2. This one should actually build out of the box.
alpha1 I hope? Else I'm not
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mabshoff wrote:
Hello folks,
here goes 3.2.1.alpha2. This one should actually build out of the box.
alpha1 I hope? Else I'm not keeping up pace!
Various setup.py issues have been fixed and the Magma doctests should
now
One more thing: Before doctesting run hg update -C on the local/bin
repo due to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/scratch/mabshoff/release-cycle/sage-3.2.1.alpha2/local/
bin$ hg sta
! ipy_profile_sage.py
I cought that on the way out, but my manual fix in the scripts spkg
was insufficient. I know the fix and
Hi, Michael,
On Nov 25, 2008, at 11:28 , mabshoff wrote:
On Nov 25, 8:25 am, Justin C. Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 23, 2008, at 03:37 , mabshoff wrote:
Built w/o problems on Mac OS X, 10.4.11 (Core 2 Duo). Test (-j2)
showed no failures.
I am surprised that the missing
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:28 AM, Tim Lahey wrote:
On Nov 26, 2008, at 12:25 AM, Bill Page wrote:
That magic worked. 'integral_test1.sage' runs as expected. Now
I'm happy. :-)
Thanks!
Great. If you have any suggestions (or code), I'd be happy to hear
them.
One thing that I wanted to
On Nov 25, 11:26 pm, William Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Martin Rubey
For cooperation: is there an equivalent of InputForm in Sage? I.e.,
given an
object (output), is there a way to have Sage output a string (input),
which
fed back into Sage
On Nov 26, 4:58 pm, Carl Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
I'm still planning to work on this for most of the basic Sage types,
but I don't know when I'll get to it; if anybody wants to help, let me
know! (The basic framework is in place in sage/misc/sage_input.py,
and there's quite a
William Stein wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ith exit status 1
sage: There was an error installing modified sage library code.
I might have a fix (not 100% tested yet, but I'm pretty confident).
Apply the patch at
On Nov 26, 4:54 pm, Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:28 AM, Tim Lahey wrote:
SNIP
Hi Bill,
In order to run these tests, it is also necessary to make some simple
additions to the 'axiom.py' interface:
[EMAIL
On Nov 26, 2008, at 7:54 PM, Bill Page wrote:
One thing that I wanted to do with your code is to include comparisons
of the answers produced by both Maxima and FriCAS as well as the
comparison to the Schaum's tabulated value. Here is a small patch to
'integral_test1.sage' (changes to other
On Nov 26, 5:13 pm, Tim Lahey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 26, 2008, at 7:54 PM, Bill Page wrote:
Hi Tim,
One thing that I wanted to do with your code is to include comparisons
of the answers produced by both Maxima and FriCAS as well as the
comparison to the Schaum's tabulated
William Stein wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mabshoff wrote:
Hello folks,
here goes 3.2.1.alpha2. This one should actually build out of the box.
alpha1 I hope? Else I'm not keeping up pace!
Various setup.py issues have been fixed and the Magma
On Nov 26, 6:32 pm, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
The following tests failed:
sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/multi_polynomial_ideal.py
Mmmh, M2 installed? Maybe a 32 vs. 64 bit thing for the toy
implementation?
sage -t
mabshoff wrote:
On Nov 26, 6:32 pm, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
The following tests failed:
sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/multi_polynomial_ideal.py
Mmmh, M2 installed? Maybe a 32 vs. 64 bit thing for the toy
implementation?
M2 installed, yes.
On Intel Mac OS X.5: after jumping through all of the appropriate
hoops to make this version, sage -testall -long had four failures, two
of which are familiar:
1. #3758 sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/crypto/mq/sr.py
2. #3760 sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/
On Nov 26, 7:38 pm, John H Palmieri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi John,
On Intel Mac OS X.5: after jumping through all of the appropriate
hoops to make this version,
:)
sage -testall -long had four failures, two
of which are familiar:
1. #3758 sage -t -long
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:38 PM, John H Palmieri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Intel Mac OS X.5: after jumping through all of the appropriate
hoops to make this version, sage -testall -long had four failures, two
of which are familiar:
1. #3758 sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/crypto/mq/sr.py
48 matches
Mail list logo
