On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 10:44:21 AM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > 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
Hi everyone, With the greatest respect, I disagree strongly - chopping and changing the notebook this way leads to a lot of instability in the code and confusion for anyone who wants to get into developing on sagenb projects. Added to the fact that none of us would have time to document changes in detail causes new contributions stagnate, which wastes effort and randomizes progress. Actually the functionality of the current notebook is good, the look and ui is very dated and as many are aware, a bit on the unpolished side. Remembering Samuel Ainsworth's really good work a few year's back, I would like to ask why was that system not developed and integrated into the local sagemath distributable? >From the trials he conducted in 2012 it ran well on Sage 5.3 and was in my >opinion a decent step forward. I'll post this to a separate question as I >wanted to explore the possibilities of getting that up and running again, even >if only for private use here. It doesn't seem to connect to sage 7.3 so I wanted to see if anyone knew why ? Very best to all Jack -- 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.
