On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 1:24:01 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
The next in line will be jupyter and friends.
I agree with this point; specifically the front-end parts of
Jupyter/JupyterLab, which run in a separate Python process (and therefore
can be installed in a completely separate
On Fri, 2023-04-28 at 18:06 +0100, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> To me at least, it would be unwise not run the test suite.
>
> If you are choosing to use 15-20 year old hardware, you can not reasonably
> to handle a large modern program like Sagemath. More modern machines than
> that get thrown
On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 at 15:49, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> The test suite can take another full day to run -- some of
> that is useful, but a lot is not. This is the biggest impediment to the
> use and development of sage on an old system.
To me at least, it would be unwise not run the test
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 2:54:47 PM UTC-7 Isuru Fernando wrote:
I guess there are several requirements we need
1. Support for all major OS/architecture combinations
2. Easy to build for rare OS/architecture combinations
3. Possible to install as a non-root user
4. Binaries are available
(I'm planning upgrades in the next year or two, but it will be to
relatively low power RISC-V hardware. There are moral, legal,
environmental, and other non-financial reasons why people use "old"
hardware. But of course the financial reasons are very real too.)
Agreed on all points.
On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 12:37 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> A problem only arises when you try to build a bleeding-edge sage on an older
> stable distro -- an undertaking unsupported by most projects.
>
> Is it? I would say that Sage is very special in this regard because of its
> extreme
