On 06/ 2/10 01:12 PM, kcrisman wrote:
On Jun 2, 4:08 am, John Cremona<john.crem...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sage surely benefits from having a very wide range of people who are
developers, ranging in age, motivations, mathematician vs. software
professional, and so on.
Don't make assumptions about the volunteer mathematicians all being
youngsters! (Some of us are over 50, and, I think, amateurs in the
best sense of the word.)
Very much so.
I never made such an assumption.
If contributing to Sage meant always (and only) promising to do
specific things by deadlines, many would (I think) fall by the
wayside, including (probably) me.
+1
Me too. I was not saying that we had to sign up in blood to keep to a rigid
structure. But to have some idea how long something is expected, when a release
might be made, how much testing time will be devoted to that release, would be
useful.
I think the best policy, given the current state (not necessarily best
overall), is to have a few reliable people who are knowledgeable about
your type of ticket, who care at least a little bit about that type,
and whom you trust to give good feedback even if it means "needs
work". For better or for worse, there are always more tickets ready
for review than people to review them - it's probably human nature ;)
> but I think honestly also it's the fact that many of us feel we would
be doing a disservice to review most tickets, due to ignorance or lack
of experience in those areas. But there are some good 2-5 person
teams who put in very high quality stuff. I think there are enough
people interested in and reliable with the build system/env. variables/
etc. that it would be easy to have an informal list of people who
would review them.
It has became more difficult with the creating of sage-solaris. There are 7
members, and I've never had a single reply to any of the 26 messages I've posted
there.
I believe there is far too little time between a release candidate and a
final release - a fact that would be obvious to any professional software
developer if a roadmap was published.
I'd agree with you here.
+1
It would be great if William could see this. Of all the things I like and
dislike about Sage, the single biggest dislike of mine is probably the way a
release is made without what I consider sufficient testing. At the most basic
level, Sage releases are made without them even being built on all supported
platforms, so sometimes they don't even compile.
In terms of a roadmap, I think it would be extremely valuable to have a list
of features that Sage is clearly lacking to be a viable alternative to the
closed source offerings, perhaps somewhere on the wiki by topic.
I agree with Robert there.
--
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
