Hi Minh,
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:12:56 +1100
Minh Nguyen <nguyenmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Burcin Erocal <bur...@erocal.org>
> wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
> > - replace the "GSoC 2010" link on the front page of the web site
> > with a "Help Wanted" or "Get Involved!" link. The "development"
> > section of the site (which should also be revised) is not enough
> > for this.
>
> The phrase "Get Involved!" sounds better. There is already a link
> called "Help" which directs you to the Sage standard documentation.
You're right, with "Help Wanted" it's hard to distinguish if it's the
users who want the help or the developers.
> > Comments?
>
> What I gather from your proposals above is that we need to have some
> kind of lists of "easy" tickets for someone to nibble on (chew lightly
> for a few hours).
The first two items were more about using the sage-wishlist target in
trac more efficiently and exposing the list of tasks stored there. For
example some items from the GSoC10 ideas list like i18n of the notebook
or portable c99 libm can/should be trac tickets. Some others, like
kerberos support or slideshow mode, already have tickets, but these
should be more exposed as good projects.
BTW, can anyone explain the difference between the sage-wishlist and
sage-feature milestones?
> The idea of such an "easy" list is to anticipate
> someone coming along and say, "I'm new to Sage. I would like to help
> out with its development. What can I do to start?" In that case, one
> could point the person to that list of "easy" tickets for the person
> to choose one, work on their chosen ticket in order to become familiar
> with the Sage development process. It is very similar to what
> Sebastien Labbe did with ticket #8362 [1] during Sage Days 20. That
> is, have a list of "easy" tickets handy for the time when someone
> wants to start out with Sage development. But how long would such an
> "easy" ticket be around before one actually fix it?
There are lot's of occasions when I look at a bug filed under the
symbolics component and say that it would be easy to fix, but cannot
justify taking the time to fix it then myself. When I actually find
some time to work on bugs, I usually go for the ones that are not
likely to be fixed by other people.
If someone wanted to learn the symbolics module, a great way to start
would be to fix sime of these easy tickets. I'm not good at writing
documentation, but I can always answer questions that come up. I'm just
looking for a way to expose these "easy tickets" to people who might be
interested.
Here are some easy tickets from symbolics:
#5650 speed up gamma_inc
#6949 add symbolic max and min functions
#7507 can't forget some assumptions
#7660 arithmetic with inequalities confusing
#8214 add better error message when symbolic expressions are
called
If you don't mind looking at the pynac source (there is a note on how
to get started here [1]):
#8297 extra parenthesis when typesetting QQ arguments to
symbolic functions
[1] http://wiki.sagemath.org/pynac/start
IMHO, the "trivial" tag you pointed out in another thread doesn't fit
here, since it's intended to specify the severity of the problem.
Though I guess if we're leaving these tickets waiting for newcomers,
they cannot be too critical.
Thank you.
Burcin
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.
