Hello ! > Agreed. great news!
Indeed. I do not know if what you have in mind about coding theory somehow overlaps with combinatorial designs (in particular orthogonal arrays/BIBD :-P) but it would be nice to shake those areas of Sage anyway. >>> Of course, all code will go through the Trac and thus indirectly progress >>> is tracked. However, since this will be longer-running thing, our plan is to >>> make a dedicated (small) web page with a road map as well as an overview of >>> already written functionality (which is furthermore annotated as already >>> included in Sage or not). This is not a blog, but just an overview for >>> new-comers, people interested in the development, or people who previously >>> rejected Sage for coding theory use but who might now reconsider it. >>> >>> One thing we have been thinking about how to handle well is development in >>> parallel with the ticket/review system. Since David is working full-time, he >>> will be producing a lot of code, and there will all the time be a >>> significant backlog in the review process. Our fear is that juggling a >>> cobweb of ticket dependencies might become clumsy if not handled well. Do >>> people have ideas for handling this well? Make many small tickets. The best way to not have many dependencies is to have your code integrated into the successive beta versions of Sage, this way your 'current code' will never be too far from the develop version. Whatever happens, please, don't come some day with 3Mb of changes. Respect our development process: write tickets, get them reviewed. Writing code takes much longer than reviewing it, so if the three of you can work by reviewing the code he writes everything will run smoothly. Also, each commit message should begin with "trac #number:", otherwise it is a mess to know which commits belong to which ticket when you have many dependencies. >>> We expect that within 2-3 months, David has made the main refactorings of >>> the existing coding theory functionality, and extended it in various ways to >>> exercise the new structure. This will most likely be more or less internal >>> (not on Trac). After this, he will start posting these changes to Trac, >>> while in parallel continuing to develop more new functionality. Once more: please, don't try to shortcut the review process. Play it fair. Don't develop everything in your office only to come back later expecting us to merge everything at once without reviewing it. Please create tickets, please discuss the implementations on the tickets, please review everything. Sage's review process makes things slower, but if you are 3+1 to be interested in this project you have the manpower (and the will) to do this properly. I will be glad to help whenever I can. It sure is a a good news. Nathann -- 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 post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
