On Sunday, November 16, 2014 9:59:34 PM UTC+1, Volker Braun wrote: > > On Sunday, November 16, 2014 8:50:41 PM UTC, john_perry_usm wrote: >> >> I get that (Travis mentioned it himself), but I'm not sure why it's >> Travis' fault. First, the only change that needed to be made was a few >> lines of Python code. If we could download & test patches as before, this >> wouldn't be a problem. >> > > You can still do that, "git show <sha1>" is just a patch that you can > apply by hand. Its going to be just as manual labor intensive and error > prone as before, of course. >
Oh, wait: are you talking about having to trace back through different tickets, on those occasions where there *was* a significant difference? In that case, yes, it was labor-intensive, and automating by git is great. No argument there. To repeat what I said in another thread: I don't object to git; I understand why it's been adopted (I'm actually using git at the moment on another system), and I had see the "git try ..." think before, so I realize the major developers recognize & are working on it. I'm not questioning all that. What I'm saying is that, for all the present setup's advantages with medium to large changes, forcing the casual developer to recompile frequently, on very minor changes, is a big disincentive. So if "git show <sha1>" obtains a usable patch that I can apply as before (I will try it at some point) then that should go into the developer's manual. john perry > > -- 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.
