Dear all: As an alternative to the proposal to back out the PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36964 whose *disputed dependency PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 which had not reached the required 2:1 supermajority *of the dispute-resolution process *(it currently only has a simple majority of 7 votes in favor, 5 votes against)* --- I am asking for your votes on that dependency PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 to heal the process. This will avoid further delays and disruptions.
*What is the modularization project?* The Sage developer community has long been aware of the severe problems that the monolithic design of Sage has brought. See in particular the lively 2016 sage-devel thread "How we develop Sage" (https://groups.google.com/g/ sage-devel/c/29ndCD8z94k) initiated by William. In its current incarnation, "modularization project" refers to my proposal from May 2020, - to use modern Python packaging ("PEP 517/518/660") and Python 3's "implicit namespace packages" to - break the Sage library into separately buildable and installable "distribution packages" - while keeping the structure of the source tree mostly unchanged, monolithic, for the convenience of the Sage developer community. For the project, hundreds of tickets/PRs have been prepared and merged over the past 4 years, see the Meta-ticket https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/29705 for a list. *Has the Sage community been informed and consulted regarding the modularization project? *Yes, in addition to the normal review that all tickets/PRs underwent: - I have given detailed presentations about the project in SageDays 110 (2020), 112.358 (2022), 120 (2023), see https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/29705 for links. - A chapter of the Sage Developer Guide, https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/packaging_sage_library.html#packaging-the-sage-library, provides a detailed description of the design - I have posted numerous times to sage-devel, most recently the series "SageMath modularization project: The five by five" (2023-06). See https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/29705 for links to all of these. - Specifically, in the post "Modularization project: V. The blocs" (https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/kiB32zP3xD4/m/GJ0qF7TTAAAJ, 2023-06), I outlined the design of the pip-installable packages such as sagemath-combinat, sagemath-graphs, sagemath-flint, sagemath-plot etc. - And in my 2023-11 post https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/kiB32zP3xD4/m/GJ0qF7TTAAAJ in the same thread, I asked: > Ready for review: A restructuring of our "all.py" files along these dependencies in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676. This is an opportunity to review the contents of the proposed distributions implemented in Mega-PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35095 (~50 kLOC changes, not open for review). As https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 rewrites all "all.py" files, it is also an opportunity for a deliberate coding style decision for these files. I welcome all constructive discussions in the PR. *What does the PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 do? *Per its title, "Restructure sage.*.all for modularization, replace relative by absolute imports". The PR is "mostly harmless": There are no user-visible changes; it's just a bunch of imports that are moved around. It includes no policy change of any kind; it only executes a design that was previously reviewed and carefully documented in separate PRs. Nothing permanent or irreversible is done here. The new files provide the top-level namespaces needed for doctesting modularized installations of Sage. *Has it been reviewed?* Yes, David Coudert and John Palmieri did a detailed review. This was completed on November 15, 2023 --- over 5 months ago. *How did this PR become "disputed"?* Back in November, one commenter floated an (untested) alternative design (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#pullrequestreview-1726079717); I explained in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-1806873154 why it's not suitable. Commenter demanded that the previously reviewed and documented design is reopened for discussion, https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-1863667919. *What are the concerns that have been made known during the voting process for this PR (March/April 2024)?* I will not attempt to paraphrase, but here are links to some posts so that you can find the discussion. - Gonzalo Tornaria https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-2048350399, https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-2048848093 - Michael Orlitzky https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-2048600337 - Martin Rubey https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-2050427818 *How to vote: *By posting a comment on the PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676. Matthias -- 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/5cb60103-9aea-4101-8be6-b88fe262ee0an%40googlegroups.com.
