Anyhow, I am for removal these docs from Sage proper, (and making sagenb optional) On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:09 AM Frédéric Chapoton <fchapot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is the alternative : what would need to be done to fix the same problem > in another way. > > Le mercredi 10 octobre 2018 10:08:00 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : >> >> >> >> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, 08:16 Frédéric Chapoton, <fchap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I agree with and support strongly this proposal of removal of sagenb doc, >>> which is a step towards having "make" (and not only "make build") being >>> working with python3. >>> >>> The alternative would require a lot of work on sagenb itself : >>> >>> * merge the deprecation pull request there >>> * release a new sagenb >>> * make a ticket for upgrading the sagenb in sage >>> * and then the doc may still be broken as sagenb is not 100% >>> python3-compatible (some issues with email remains) >> >> >> I believe this is independent of removal of sagenb docs from Sage proper, no? >>> >>> >>> Frédéric >>> >>> >>> Le mercredi 10 octobre 2018 07:27:59 UTC+2, John H Palmieri a écrit : >>>> >>>> At https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/25382, it is being proposed to remove >>>> the documentation for the legacy Sage notebook, a.k.a. sagenb, from the >>>> reference manual. Some reasons for this: >>>> >>>> - sagenb does not work with Python 3, nor does its documentation, so if we >>>> want the docs to build with Python 3, we need to delete it. >>>> - Indeed, sagenb is not really being developed, as far as I can tell. >>>> Maintained to some extent, but not developed. Please correct me if this is >>>> incorrect. >>>> - Some distributions remove this from the reference manual already (as far >>>> as I understand). >>>> - The reference manual should be for Sage proper, not for its components. >>>> The reference manual doesn't include documentation for IPython or the >>>> Jupyter notebook. It does include links to them, and the proposal would be >>>> to give as good a link as possible to sagenb. >>>> >>>> Some reasons against this: >>>> >>>> - sagenb used to be part of Sage, so its role is different from other >>>> components like IPython, etc. >>>> >>>> By the way, it is straightforward to remove the sagenb documentation >>>> completely. It is more complicated and kind of ugly, but possible, to >>>> include the docs in the reference manual conditionally on whether Sage is >>>> built with Python 2 or Python 3. This is discussed on the ticket. >>>> >>>> Any comments? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> John >>>> >>> -- >>> 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+...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > 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.
-- 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.
