On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Dima Pasechnik <dimp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Who does have commit access to https://github.com/sagemath/sagenb ? > (not me). > Karl is obviously overwhelmed with other things. > If I had this access I could have reviewed at least some of these tickets > (we still would want to keep upstream on github, right?)
I've added you. There are 9 people who can commit (some long missing) who can commit, including you, which I think you can see here: https://github.com/orgs/sagemath/teams/sage-notebook Anybody who wants to be added, say so and I (or maybe Dima) can add them. William > > Dima > > On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 2:26:15 PM UTC+1, Jonathan Gutow wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> Things really have stalled. My fixes to the code to handle properly >> putting the notebook behind a proxy since the server mechanism in SageNB is >> not robust have languished for over a year. >> >> Jonathan >> Dr. Jonathan H. Gutow >> Chemistry Department gu...@uwosh.edu >> UW-Oshkosh >> Office:920-424-1326 >> 800 Algoma Boulevard FAX:920-424-2042 >> Oshkosh, WI 54901 >> http://www.uwosh.edu/facstaff/gutow/ >> >> On Apr 15, 2016, at 4:38 AM, mmarco <mma...@unizar.es> wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> El viernes, 15 de abril de 2016, 10:44:22 (UTC+2), Jeroen Demeyer >> escribió: >>> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> I propose to make SageNB no longer a separate package but to move it >>> back into the Sage git tree. For purposes of installation and use of >>> SageNB, it will still be a separate Python package, but the sources will >>> be in $SAGE_ROOT/src/sagenb instead of a separate git repo. The changes >>> to the Sage build system to support this move will be minimal. >>> >>> The reason is that SageNB is truly in maintenance mode currently. Making >>> new SageNB releases regularly to fix things is a burden for the SageNB >>> release manager Karl-Dieter Crisman. On #14840 [1], he said "the sooner >>> sagenb gets back in Sage proper, the better!" >>> >>> The original reason to split SageNB from Sage was to enable quick >>> development. That worked for a while, but now that development has >>> stalled, this reason no longer applies. A secondary reason was to make >>> SageNB truly independent from Sage, but that also never happened. So I >>> see no reason to keep SageNB split from Sage currently. >>> >>> I know this is a controversial proposal, but it will certainly be easier >>> to maintain SageNB this way. I also want to stress that this is >>> orthogonal to any future deprecation or removal of SageNB: we can still >>> do that from the Sage git tree. >>> >>> Jeroen. >>> >>> >>> >>> [1] http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/14840#comment:58 >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "sage-notebook" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to sage-noteboo...@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-notebook. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-notebook" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-notebook+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-notebook. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William (http://wstein.org) -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
