Your suggestions all look very sensible to me -- go for it (provided several other people agree, of course).
John On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 3:09 PM, David Kirkby <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: > As has been remarked before, Sage has number lists of "supported > platforms", no two of which agree with each other. > > I proposed some time ago we break the list into 3 > > 1) Fully supported - every Sage release is tested on it. > 2) Expected to work > 3) Probably will not work, but porting work in ongoing > > See > > http://wiki.sagemath.org/suggested-for-supported-platforms > > Now we have a build bot for Sage, it is relatively easy to test every > release of Sage on a number of systems. Currently there are 17 systems > on which Sage is being built. > > http://build.sagemath.org/sage/waterfall > > I suggest that we provide a page like > > http://wiki.sagemath.org/suggested-for-supported-platforms > > but put those 17 systems into the "Fully supported". That means the > exact versions of the operating systems would be given, and not just > "Fedora" or "Ubunta", OS X or Solaris. > > Then, we move into the "Expected to work" category, recent > distributions of these systems, and any older ones we might expect to > work, but do not actually test on. > > Any attempt to say we support "the latest release" of a distribution > is IMHO unwise, as we can't possibly do this. Linux distributions come > out all the time, and often break. Apparently Sage has been broken for > some time on OpenSUSE 11.2 and 11.3. > > We should then have an errata page like > > http://wiki.sagemath.org/errata > > to let people know of any issues that are discovered after the release. > > Does this sound reasonable to everyone? If so, I am willing to collect > the exact information about all the systems in the buildbot, and add > them to the "Fully supported". (I'm assuming that Sage can be made to > pass all tests on all the hardware on the buildbots, though if that is > not so, then that system would obviously not be placed in the "Fully > supported" section). > > Given we have a buildbot, it should be fairly easy to create binaries > for all these systems too, and make the binaries available. > > We really *must* get ride of all these different lists of "supported" > systems and have one single list, and as many links to that list as we > want. Then the list only needs to get updated in one place. > > If we can get agreement on this, I'll do the work, but I'm not going > to waste my time finding out the right information, if there are going > to be endless arguments of what we support. To me, fully supporting > what we can easily test on is the right way to proceed. > > Since Minh has been using an external server (I think run by GNU) for > Debian, we can probably add Debian at some point if we can get > permission to run a buildbot slave there. > > > > Dave > > -- > 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 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
