Re: [sage-devel] Re: When/by who/how was the "code of conduct" initiated ?
Hi Simon and all, > If a substantial part of our community would share that attitude, we'd be in > serious trouble, I am afraid. > > For creating a conflict, it is in some cases sufficient to have a single > person who had have a bad day or didn't sleep enough, causing a temporary > misjudgement. > > However, for keeping a conflict boiling, it is in all cases necessary to have > several people who are committing continued misjudgements. And that's what > the mentioned attitude achieves. > > And unfortunately, a code of conduct can not prevent a temporary > misjudgement, but it may encourage the mentioned attitude, making conflicts a > lot more violent. > > In other words, if you are able to see a legitimate request behind a wall of > behaviour that seems inappropriate to you, then you should answer that > request. It is fine if you are not able to, but then > please don't answer at all. I think the whole conundrum is not about one person having a bad day, but repeated behaviors that many different people perceive as offensive and are turned away by. That, to a community of volunteers, is dangerous! It is counter productive and takes a lot of positive energy away. Viviane mentioned already once the situation where someone opens a thread to discuss something, but then gets attacked and/or the discussion disintegrates. Then what do you do if you still want to discuss these issues? Since you seem to have very strong opinions how things should be done and I am in such a situation, I would like to know how should this be handled? Best, Anne -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi, On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 07:27:38PM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:58:00PM +0100, Thierry wrote: > > No, there is no consensus at all. It is not because a few people are going > > round on some naming issue that all other issues are settled (not even > > that particular issue either). > > I am not saying that it suffices to change the name. OK, sorry if i misunderstood, you seemed to support a vote about that (even proposing a third alternative name) since your message was: On 28/11/2014 18:00, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:08:47AM -0800, Jakob Kroeker wrote: >>Question 1: who of the initial 'yes' voters would insist to keep the >>term 'code of conduct' >>Question 2: who of the initial 'No' voters would accept the term >>'guidelines' instead with content as is >>Question 3: who would accept the term 'guidelines' and also insist >>on >>changing the content of the behaviour guidelines > > Ah, thanks for running this poll! I have been meaning to do it, but > did not get the time; it indeed feels like that the discussion is > going in round when there is a rather clear consensus emerging. > > As I said earlier, I'd be very fine with guidelines, or any variant > that would not make our friends uncomfortable because of a potential > confusion with law. Etiquette (sagiquette?) is quite fine too as it > relates to well established traditions on the net; not only because > it's french :-) > > I have no strong opinion on the specific content. If you consider that more serious problem were pointed by various people and that there are not settled, then we agree, and this was my main point here. > Yet from all I heard in the previous discussion I don't foresee any > strong obstacle on building a consensus on *some* document. Some people were opposed to the existence of such a text (i was not in the absolute, see the beginning of my first e-mail), and this should be acknowledged, even if those people did not insist (there are still interesting bits in there). > Yes there is no rush. Yes this will take some time. OK, so why supporting another vote right now ? > Now given that you seem to know so well how things shall be done [1], > please take the lead. Well, i precisely would like no one to take the lead (nor a small subgroup as just happened). For me the correct way is the way we will decide together. Of course i will participate to such discussion, but i do not plan to impose anything, this would be inconsistent. Ciao, Thierry > I trust you. I trust > you'll do a great job [2]. > > Cheers, > Nicolas > > [1] Yes, I am kindly teasing you a bit here :-) > Tes grands airs de ces derniers temps m'ont un peu agacé ... Si tu veux faire une remarque (pas particulierement "kindly") en francais sur une mailing-liste comme si c'etait un message prive, tu connais mon adresse mail (non, je ne me refererai pas au code de conduite). Ceci-dit, ca tombe bien, c'etait le but. Pour info, devoir tirer l'alarme comme je l'ai fait n'est pas agreable et n'amene que des ennemis (la preuve?), il m'aurait ete plus facile de rester au chaud quand les tuiles volent bas. > [2] I am very serious here. > > -- > Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" > http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Saturday, 29 November 2014 02:04:41 UTC+11, mmarco wrote: > > I definitely like the idea of "guidelines" over "code of conduct". > As one of the people who voted yes, I definitely prefer guidelines. I also think that those who care should work towards editing the "guidelines" on the wiki with the aim of reaching a consensus so that we can vote on it. As the vote for the "code of conduct" was very close and there are a significant number of people who are unhappy with the outcome, or the with way in which the vote was conducted (or both), we have to do something. One of the aims of introducing this code was to help bring the community closer together and I think it's failed dismally in this regard. People are raising valid objections and these should be addressed. Andrew -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Friday, November 28, 2014 11:37:20 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote: > > Hi Maldun, > > On 2014-11-28, maldun > wrote: > > So far as I understand, this code/guidline/whatever does not serve as a > > law, or is written in stone, > > nor does it say: "If you don't behave as stated in the code, you will be > > teared feathered and be banned forever!" > > It is the experience of some people participating in the discussion that > there is a difference between the official intention of a set of rules, > and the spirit in which the rules will eventually be used in reality. > > Dima has provided a link to some communist code of conduct. Its rules seem > mainly harmless, but since social rules are never objective, it is always > possible to use them against unwanted people. > > And to give you an example that is smaller than Soviet Union: > I have seen teachers claiming that the rules they set up just > serve to the good of the class (in the current discussion, the word > "safety nest" was used), but all what they did was creating a snake pit > (and I'd say: deliberately). In one case, four pupils out of a class of > 20 pupils left the school within one year. From two of them I know that > they left since the teacher's rules could too easily be instrumented by > bullies. > > > I don't think it's that big deal, it's like hanging up some nice slogans > on > > your wall like 'Be nice to others.' > > That's totally opposite to my experience. I respect that the majority of > people here wants some kind of code of conduct/guideline/etiquette. But > I also know that it can be used as a weapon to nuke a society. So, haste > in creating the thing can be fatal. > > Cheers, > Simon > > I can follow your concerns but as stated in my other post, there is one thing missing to be a law/rule: A consequence. If you consider teachers or the soviet union, there was also a form of authority. The sage community has no leader/excecutive which executes the laws. So are they really laws? In my opinion they are rather statements. -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Friday, November 28, 2014 11:04:08 PM UTC+1, vdelecroix wrote: > > Hi, > > 2014-11-28 15:48 UTC−06:00, maldun >: > > Hi all! > > > > I quite watched this discussion for this so called code of conduct. > There > > are a lot of > > opponents of this idea and I wonder why. > > Please tell me who? As far as I read, nobody proposed to have nothing. > We are just discussing what. You are welcome to participate but not to > negate the work in progress. > > Erm, even the Wiki states as alternative 'nothing'? So at least one would have that in mind. But thats not precisely what I meant. To be more specific: 'A lot of proponents of the code which was initially stated.' > > So far as I understand, this code/guidline/whatever does not serve as a > > law, or is written in stone, > > nor does it say: "If you don't behave as stated in the code, you will be > > teared feathered and be banned forever!" > > That is precisely the issue: its aim is not explicit and it is written as > a law. > > I may be wrong, but doesn't a (social) law or rule need some sort of consequence (penalty etc.) and someone who executes it to actually be a law? In the current state it's simply a statement. > > I don't think it's that big deal, it's like hanging up some nice slogans > on > > your wall like 'Be nice to others.' > > This might not reflect the sentiment of the community. And not > everybody have to like "nice slogans". > > Define sentiment of the community? The sentiment of the a) whole community, b) the majority or c) some particular members whcih can be considered as the leaders. If you consider a) as your definition then, like in every big community, the chances are near zero that this ever will happen. If you consider b) a vote was already made, and I suppose you exclude c) as an option. I personally think that it is more important to not contradict the sentiment of the community, but thats just my opinion. > > And I really like such codes because it states that the community wants > > that it's members are nice to each others. > > Now, you consider that it is not only a slogan ;-) My main concern > with your sentence is that you make a distinction between "the > community" and "the members". What is this difference? > > Vincent > I just wanted to say that it appears to me, that communities who remember their members from time to time to be nice to each other tend to actually do this. But yes this is simply a personal experience, and has no deeper foundation. If you want to nitpick: It's like the difference between a set and its elements. And since members are individuals, and actually humans, they can be nice to each other. A community is not a human being, but a set of members who work on/with some software/whatever. Maybe my comments seem a little bit sarcastic, but I personally think the emotions concerning this matter are quite high, on something which does not really seem to have such a deep impact on the project. Maybe I am wrong, but from my experience this will lead to the following: A lot of time and energy is wasted on something not that big, although maybe bigger problems would need more attention and finally come to - a solution everyone is equally unhappy or - It will be discussed forever till everyone is tired, and in the end nothing happens. Sorry for being so sarcastic but I have quite some experience on such matters (and it always happens just read newspapers ...). Also I'm currently reading some books about innovations and novelities and it is quite shocking how precisely the theory apply in this current situation ... -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
2014-11-28 23:43 GMT+01:00 Simon King : > Hi Vincent, > > On 2014-11-28, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Please tell me who? As far as I read, nobody proposed to have nothing. > > I did propose to have nothing. > > I still think that setting good examples is vastly superiour to *any* > kind of written rules. However, I acknowledge that a slight majority > of people wants written rules. Now, the aim is to create something that > is as unlikely to do damage as possible. > > Thank you for acknowledging this fact. I do listen to your arguments too. In both examples you give of bad use of a code of conduct, there is a group of people who have some power and they use their co called code of conduct as a general law to abuse of their power. In our situation at least, there is no one with power, we're all equals. But still, I don't want anything like the situations you describe and that is why I totally agree that whatever "code" we have, it should never be a law. > Cheers, > Simon > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Vincent, On 2014-11-28, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Please tell me who? As far as I read, nobody proposed to have nothing. I did propose to have nothing. I still think that setting good examples is vastly superiour to *any* kind of written rules. However, I acknowledge that a slight majority of people wants written rules. Now, the aim is to create something that is as unlikely to do damage as possible. Cheers, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Maldun, On 2014-11-28, maldun wrote: > So far as I understand, this code/guidline/whatever does not serve as a > law, or is written in stone, > nor does it say: "If you don't behave as stated in the code, you will be > teared feathered and be banned forever!" It is the experience of some people participating in the discussion that there is a difference between the official intention of a set of rules, and the spirit in which the rules will eventually be used in reality. Dima has provided a link to some communist code of conduct. Its rules seem mainly harmless, but since social rules are never objective, it is always possible to use them against unwanted people. And to give you an example that is smaller than Soviet Union: I have seen teachers claiming that the rules they set up just serve to the good of the class (in the current discussion, the word "safety nest" was used), but all what they did was creating a snake pit (and I'd say: deliberately). In one case, four pupils out of a class of 20 pupils left the school within one year. From two of them I know that they left since the teacher's rules could too easily be instrumented by bullies. > I don't think it's that big deal, it's like hanging up some nice slogans on > your wall like 'Be nice to others.' That's totally opposite to my experience. I respect that the majority of people here wants some kind of code of conduct/guideline/etiquette. But I also know that it can be used as a weapon to nuke a society. So, haste in creating the thing can be fatal. Cheers, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Volker, On 2014-11-28, Volker Braun wrote: > No. Just "code" can be short for: "code of law", and that is what the > dictionary entry says. But "code of foo" for foo!=law is not a kind of > "code of law". Reading my posts, you certainly noticed that I did not claim that a "code of conduct" is some kind of "code of law" by definition. I spoke about associations and connotations. If a language's dictionary contains the entries "code" and "code of foo", then of course there is an association of the two entries. And simply by how the human brain processes language, it will consciously or unconsciously create a connotation. In any case, you are not more native speaker than I. So, unless they will be backed up by a bunch of native speakers, I don't see a reason to find your assertions convincing. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi, I updated a proposition at the very end of the wiki page http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct It is not aimed to be finished or proposed to vote right now. No usurpation please. Vincent -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi, 2014-11-28 15:48 UTC−06:00, maldun : > Hi all! > > I quite watched this discussion for this so called code of conduct. There > are a lot of > opponents of this idea and I wonder why. Please tell me who? As far as I read, nobody proposed to have nothing. We are just discussing what. You are welcome to participate but not to negate the work in progress. > So far as I understand, this code/guidline/whatever does not serve as a > law, or is written in stone, > nor does it say: "If you don't behave as stated in the code, you will be > teared feathered and be banned forever!" That is precisely the issue: its aim is not explicit and it is written as a law. > I don't think it's that big deal, it's like hanging up some nice slogans on > your wall like 'Be nice to others.' This might not reflect the sentiment of the community. And not everybody have to like "nice slogans". > And I really like such codes because it states that the community wants > that it's members are nice to each others. Now, you consider that it is not only a slogan ;-) My main concern with your sentence is that you make a distinction between "the community" and "the members". What is this difference? Vincent -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi all! I quite watched this discussion for this so called code of conduct. There are a lot of opponents of this idea and I wonder why. So far as I understand, this code/guidline/whatever does not serve as a law, or is written in stone, nor does it say: "If you don't behave as stated in the code, you will be teared feathered and be banned forever!" I don't think it's that big deal, it's like hanging up some nice slogans on your wall like 'Be nice to others.' And I really like such codes because it states that the community wants that it's members are nice to each others. And we all know that there are communities which are the complete oposite of nice to their users/each other. So no harm, just like the 'other code' in https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-flame/ST-8uPshOR4 -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Publication of code of conduct?
No, it is a statement of fact of what was voted on (changing that text would make the statement untrue), and a place to put forwards better[1] alternatives than can then be voted in to replace what is there. I created it with the hope of focusing attention on the future rather than waste time dwelling on the suboptimal (but I don't think in any way malicious) process that got us where we are now. [1] I realize better is subjective, but at least one measure is much broader community acceptance. On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:45 AM, Simon King wrote: > Hi! > > Do I understand correctly that http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct is > open for editing for a while, before making the code of conduct > official? How long will this take? > > Best regards, > Simon > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Friday, November 28, 2014 7:05:06 PM UTC, Simon King wrote: > > Not only to us. According to the American Heritage dictionary that I > quoted in a previous post, that association exists in (American) > English, too. > No. Just "code" can be short for: "code of law", and that is what the dictionary entry says. But "code of foo" for foo!=law is not a kind of "code of law". -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Nov 28, 2014 12:21 PM, "Simon King" wrote: > > Hi William, > > On 2014-11-28, William Stein wrote: > > Yes, I created it. The members are me, David Joyner (sage Dev #2), and > > Harald Schilly. > > Interesting. Previously there was talk about the 12 (or so) main > contributors of Sage code becoming members of that list. > That was suggested and almost immediately retracted based on numerous solid arguments against it. If you - as a long time sage dev - would like to be an admin on the list to help make our perspective more diverse, let me know and we will add you. William > Best regards, > Simon > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
>> - If there is a "violation" of a code of conduct, it means that it >> was a rule. I like very much the modification of Anne about how to >> behave when such a "violation" occurs (people are not police). > > Apparently I missed it. Can you point me to what Anne said? Anyway, I > totally agree that an etiquette should also include recommendations on > how to react in the case of conflict in order to lay the conflict to > rest. It is on the wiki (look at the diff for autorship). Note that I said "modification of Anne" ;-) -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
A short voting period certainly makes the result open to dispute. Anyone wishing to post anything offensive to some people will be unlikely to abide by some code which he/she might not have read, anyway. Sage-flame is always there, anyway. RJF > -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi William, On 2014-11-28, William Stein wrote: > Yes, I created it. The members are me, David Joyner (sage Dev #2), and > Harald Schilly. Interesting. Previously there was talk about the 12 (or so) main contributors of Sage code becoming members of that list. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
2014-11-28 20:24 GMT+01:00 Simon King : > Hi Viviane, > > On 2014-11-28, Viviane Pons wrote: > > As a "yes" voter, I would be totally in favor of changing the name to > > "guidelines". > > So, technically, your "yes" vote should in fact be counted as "no", > because the vote was about a specific version of the text? > My 'yes' is still a 'yes'. I read and accepted the text as it was. But still, in fine, I find "guidelines" better, because: * I was convinced by other people's point (yes, that can happen!) * What I want most is having a text that most people agree on I also found the vote was taking place too early. Actually, I was afraid that the 'no' would win and that the matter would be buried and ignored and that nothing would change. (Honestly, nobody could predict the result of the vote, it was really a close call). So because I wanted a text and I, personally, had no objections against the proposed text, I voted 'yes'. I was afraid indeed that because people were divided, the vote would settle nothing (and I was right, obviously!). As for now, we're in a very delicate situation as some people recognize the vote and some don't, and many "no" voters feel they've been imposed on. What I personally read from the vote is that *some* kind of text has to exists: if the actual code was just to be removed (well, I must say, I don't really consider that it exists right now...) and no other text was to be accepted, then we would be in uproar just as we are now, because the 'yes' voters would feel deceived. But as it is now, I don't want to keep this text (but I do want something instead). Not because I refute what is in it but because I find it useless if it's not accepted by so many developers. Also, I'm sensible to your (and other) arguments (about 'guidelines' instead of codes, about not giving orders 'be be be' etc). At the end, I want everyone, 'yes' and 'no' voters to feel good and welcome in the community we all share and like. Also, to most virulent people on both sides: I think there is no point arguing about the actual status of the code or the legitimacy of the vote. It will lead us nowhere. What we should do, is work on a consensus as some of us started. I also think, little 'so called' votes about amendments are quite useless, we've seen what quick votes have done. Let us give us some time (how much? I don't know, as much as needed I'd say) to find something that we feel does not divide us so much. Then, we could put it to vote because (because absolute consensus where everyone agree is difficult to reach), but a vote of which result we would accept. To finish, once again, we all want the same thing! Cheers Viviane > > > I'm also in favor of voting a new text that carries more people on. I > think > > we're in a bad situation now, with a vote that not everybody recognizes > and > > divides the community. I am in favor of some kind of "code of conduct" > but > > dividing the community is counter productive. > > +1. But this time please *after* an open discussion on the text. > > I do recognise that the majority of voters wants some kind of > guidelines, but I do not recognise that the majority of voters wants > this text, and also I do not recognise that the voting met democratic > standards. > > A technical question: How can a discussion on text be organised? A wiki > is of course one option for collaborative edition of a text, but I don't > see how arguments can be exchanged by wiki. > > Best regards, > Simon > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
- William Stein (cell phone) On Nov 28, 2014 11:32 AM, "Simon King" wrote: > > Hi Vincent, > > On 2014-11-28, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If you treat people like children, you should not expect from them > > to be adults. > > +1 > > > - The previous vote ended with the creation of a new discussion list > > sage-ab...@googelgroups.com that no one has voted for, whose status is > > not clear (public/private), whose function is not defined, etc. > > +1. Has it really been created already? Unbelievable. > Yes, I created it. The members are me, David Joyner (sage Dev #2), and Harald Schilly. I will change it so only members can see posts. Anybody can post to the list. It can be used for other things besides just the code of conduct, e.g., copyright issues, etc. Frequently people just email me directly when they feel abused as a result of the sage project, so this will be better. I stand by the 3 day majority vote and the outcome. Again, if people do the work to create something that is more broadly acceptable, then I encourage a similar vote to replace the current code by something else. William > > - If there is a "violation" of a code of conduct, it means that it > > was a rule. I like very much the modification of Anne about how to > > behave when such a "violation" occurs (people are not police). > > Apparently I missed it. Can you point me to what Anne said? Anyway, I > totally agree that an etiquette should also include recommendations on > how to react in the case of conflict in order to lay the conflict to > rest. > > > - As pointed out several times, it is very dangerous to create rules > > that have to be followed. The interpretation of a text is always > > subjective. > > +1. Many of us are mathematicians, and tend to be able to discuss a > donkey's legs off. So, it should be made absolutely clear that the > "etiquette" contains guidelines, but does certainly not constitute a > code. > > Best regards, > Simon > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Nicolas, On 2014-11-28, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > I am not saying that it suffices to change the name. Yet from all I > heard in the previous discussion I don't foresee any strong obstacle > on building a consensus on *some* document. I somehow agree. > Yes there is no rush. Yes this will take some time. > Now given that you seem to know so well how > things shall be done [1], please take the lead. Do you have a recommendation of a technical solution that allows to exchange arguments while collaboratively editing a text? Best regards, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Vincent, On 2014-11-28, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you treat people like children, you should not expect from them > to be adults. +1 > - The previous vote ended with the creation of a new discussion list > sage-ab...@googelgroups.com that no one has voted for, whose status is > not clear (public/private), whose function is not defined, etc. +1. Has it really been created already? Unbelievable. > - If there is a "violation" of a code of conduct, it means that it > was a rule. I like very much the modification of Anne about how to > behave when such a "violation" occurs (people are not police). Apparently I missed it. Can you point me to what Anne said? Anyway, I totally agree that an etiquette should also include recommendations on how to react in the case of conflict in order to lay the conflict to rest. > - As pointed out several times, it is very dangerous to create rules > that have to be followed. The interpretation of a text is always > subjective. +1. Many of us are mathematicians, and tend to be able to discuss a donkey's legs off. So, it should be made absolutely clear that the "etiquette" contains guidelines, but does certainly not constitute a code. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Viviane, On 2014-11-28, Viviane Pons wrote: > As a "yes" voter, I would be totally in favor of changing the name to > "guidelines". So, technically, your "yes" vote should in fact be counted as "no", because the vote was about a specific version of the text? > I'm also in favor of voting a new text that carries more people on. I think > we're in a bad situation now, with a vote that not everybody recognizes and > divides the community. I am in favor of some kind of "code of conduct" but > dividing the community is counter productive. +1. But this time please *after* an open discussion on the text. I do recognise that the majority of voters wants some kind of guidelines, but I do not recognise that the majority of voters wants this text, and also I do not recognise that the voting met democratic standards. A technical question: How can a discussion on text be organised? A wiki is of course one option for collaborative edition of a text, but I don't see how arguments can be exchanged by wiki. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Nicolas, On 2014-11-28, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > Ah, thanks for running this poll! I have been meaning to do it, but > did not get the time; it indeed feels like that the discussion is > going in round when there is a rather clear consensus emerging. > > As I said earlier, I'd be very fine with guidelines, or any variant > that would not make our friends uncomfortable because of a potential > confusion with law. Etiquette (sagiquette?) is quite fine too as it > relates to well established traditions on the net; not only because > it's french :-) > > I have no strong opinion on the specific content. If I understand correctly what William and Volker are saying, they claim it is too late for a change anyway, because of the outcome of a voting on very short notice that was done during weekend while an intense and very critical discussion was still ongoing (which is a well-known trick of manipulation), and although some people stated they did not feel enough informed or even intimidated by the way of voting. I find it really shameful what is currently happening in the Sage community. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On 2014-11-28, Nathann Cohen wrote: >> Let me try a last time, just replace code with book: > > We will never understand. Give it up ! It is unfortunate, but to us > "code" is associated with "law". Not only to us. According to the American Heritage dictionary that I quoted in a previous post, that association exists in (American) English, too. -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Volker, On 2014-11-28, Volker Braun wrote: > No, there is no association beyond the codified = written down. Of course > the writing down part that is in "code of law". I'll leave it as an > exercise to identify "code of ..." in English that are not enforcable laws. Read the link that I provided. -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: BUG??? in function "implicit_plot"
I found the answer... to use the option "aspect_ratio='automatic'". Thank you! -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: BUG??? in function "implicit_plot"
I found the answer... to use the option "aspect_ratio='automatic'" -- 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.
[sage-devel] BUG??? in function "implicit_plot"
Dear all, I'm trying to plot an implicit function with a "y"-axis range
three orders of magnitude greater than the range of the "x"-axis.
If I use logarithmic scale, the resulting plot is the one shown in
"sage0.png"... However, when a linear scale is used, the plot collapses
(see the file "sage1.png")
I would say this is a BUG, because the expected result should be an
automatic linear scaling of the "y"-axis. But I could be misusing the code.
THX
CODE:
sage: reset()
sage: var('MN', domain='positive', latex_name=r"M_N")
sage: var('Vtausq', domain='positive', latex_name=r"\left|V_{\tau N}\right|^2")
sage: var('MWR', domain='positive', latex_name=r"M_{W_R}")
sage: mmu = 0.105 # GeV
sage: mtau= 1.7# GeV
sage: Eff = 1 # To be scaled
sage: Nevents = 5 # Number of observed events
sage: Ntaus = 4.9E8 # Taus generated on the experiment (ShiP??)
sage: npot= 2E20 # Potential number of events
sage: xcc = 4.5E-4 #
sage: BrDs = 0.0554 # Branching ratio D_s -> tau + nu_tau
sage: Brtau = 1 # Branching ratio tau -> X + nu_tau
sage: BrN = 0.036 # Branching ratio N -> mu + mu + nu
sage: BB = BrDs * Brtau * BrN * (80.385/MWR)^4 * ( 1 - (MN/mtau)^2 ) * ( 1 -
(2*mmu/MN)^2 ) * heaviside(MN - 2*mmu) * heaviside(mtau - MN)
sage: edet = 8E-5 * MN^5 * 1E7 * (80.385/MWR)^4 * Eff
sage: eq = npot * 2 * xcc * BB * edet - Nevents
sage: eq
sage: G = Graphics()
sage: G = implicit_plot(eq, (MN,.1,2), (MWR,5E3,11E3), scale=('semilogy',2))
sage: G
sage: G1 = Graphics()
sage: G1 = implicit_plot(eq, (MN,.1,2), (MWR,5E3,11E3))
sage: G1
--
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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:58:00PM +0100, Thierry wrote: > No, there is no consensus at all. It is not because a few people are going > round on some naming issue that all other issues are settled (not even > that particular issue either). I am not saying that it suffices to change the name. Yet from all I heard in the previous discussion I don't foresee any strong obstacle on building a consensus on *some* document. Yes there is no rush. Yes this will take some time. Now given that you seem to know so well how things shall be done [1], please take the lead. I trust you. I trust you'll do a great job [2]. Cheers, Nicolas [1] Yes, I am kindly teasing you a bit here :-) Tes grands airs de ces derniers temps m'ont un peu agacé ... [2] I am very serious here. -- Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: When/by who/how was the "code of conduct" initiated ?
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:40:42AM -0800, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > ... pirates had it, too. > >'the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules' - >Captain Barbossa ROTFL :-) Welcome aboard the Black Sage! Nicolas -- Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] When/by who/how was the "code of conduct" initiated ?
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:48:01AM +0530, Nathann Cohen wrote: >I understand. :-) >I also understand that nobody in your short-list could feel entitled to >give the others' name, but this can be solved easily: would you be >willing to send them an email and ask whether they object to this >request ? Somebody could then answer this question, or tell us that >some members do not want to reveal their identity. They are grown up and read sage-devel :-) I'll just add that this was a diverse smallish group of people from three different continents. >... about how this was run ... As I said: I certainly agree, in retrospect, that things could have been done better. But I see it as rather pointless to discuss further the how and why given that nothing irreversible was decided: William explicitly left the door open. And even if he had not, we, as a community, rule. Now what we need to do is to build a 2.0. We all agree that "friendliness" can't be imposed by law. Whatever document is up at the end will be effective if and only if the community, as a whole, adheres to it. So yeah, let's build this consensus. And since some people voiced strong opinions on how this shall be done, I am very happy letting them take the lead :-) > I know exactly how you feel. I have been trying to remind peole for > two years of wrong results returned by Sage, I tried to fix it > myself many many times only to find out I was not competent on this > part of the code. I also tried to say that the way findstat was > implemented in Sage could be less intrusive, and there were others > examples. And yet I took this code of conduct to be against me even > though I tried, clumsily and honestly, to make our code a better > code. Thanks for sharing! I (and everybody else I believe) very much appreciate your hard work toward making Sage more robust. There are indeed crappy things that are horribly lagging behind (permutations, integerlistlex, ... ). I know how frustrating it is when things don't move and we don't have leverage. It's good to have someone pushing toward their resolution. The question is only about the most effective way to achieve this. I believe what people have been reacting against was someone trying to impose them an agenda by leaning on their guiltiness. For findstat there was a lot of rambling around; but in practice the reaching of a consensus and its implementation was a matter of a couple hours. For the specific thing you have in mind, remember that we don't agree on whether it was a bug or a missing feature. And we don't have to agree, especially since the issue is now resolved (thanks Anne! thanks Travis!). In short: this was never meant against you as a person. But rather as an attempt to foster the improvement of certain actions of you, among others, and in fact of everybody, me first. Cheers, Nicolas PS: I don't know whether this is related in anyway to that attempt; and don't really care either. But your reading of that "Non Violent Communication" book, and its immediate put to good use in your recent e-mails, are a blessing. This is in fact the nicest gift I received in a while :-) -- Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:00:31PM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:08:47AM -0800, Jakob Kroeker wrote: > >Question 1: who of the initial 'yes' voters would insist to keep the > >term 'code of conduct' > >Question 2: who of the initial 'No' voters would accept the term > >'guidelines' instead with content as is > >Question 3: who would accept the term 'guidelines' and also insist on > >changing the content of the behaviour guidelines > > Ah, thanks for running this poll! I have been meaning to do it, but > did not get the time; it indeed feels like that the discussion is > going in round when there is a rather clear consensus emerging. No, there is no consensus at all. It is not because a few people are going round on some naming issue that all other issues are settled (not even that particular issue either). Also, the content of this vote is biased: asking a question about the title of a text considers de facto that the contents of the text is already accepted, and even that the existence of such a text is accepted. Which is not true. A question that depends on unsettled questions can not be settled. I think serious issues have been raised by various people during this event, so i do not agree with a fast and dirty solution that hides problems, otherwise unfixed issues will reappear. I prefer all of us to continue discussing to let a true consensus emerge, respecting all points of views, not a fake one that people will agree on to get a good atmosphere back, whatever the content. We should not hide problems or it will be endless. Note that calling for a vote while claiming that there is a consensus is a kind of contradiction. If we want a text that does not divide the community, we have to accept that this takes time. "Botching" a solution that will add some people on the pro side to ensure a stronger majority is not the right way. Ciao, Thierry > As I said earlier, I'd be very fine with guidelines, or any variant > that would not make our friends uncomfortable because of a potential > confusion with law. Etiquette (sagiquette?) is quite fine too as it > relates to well established traditions on the net; not only because > it's french :-) > > I have no strong opinion on the specific content. > > Cheers, > Nicolas > -- > Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" > http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ > > -- > 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. > > -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
It is not an opposition of terms "code of conduct" vs "guidelines" or whatever. The main problem is not the title but the form and some of the content! Let me point out what I found very bad in it - All paragraphs are orders Be [...] Be [...] Be [...] If you treat people like children, you should not expect from them to be adults. - The previous vote ended with the creation of a new discussion list sage-ab...@googelgroups.com that no one has voted for, whose status is not clear (public/private), whose function is not defined, etc. - If there is a "violation" of a code of conduct, it means that it was a rule. I like very much the modification of Anne about how to behave when such a "violation" occurs (people are not police). But I still find the term violation inappropriate. - As pointed out several times, it is very dangerous to create rules that have to be followed. The interpretation of a text is always subjective. I am convinced that if this is stated as a rule then some people will claim (honestly) that some others are wrong. Instead, it should be only written that anybody should try very hard to follow them... but no more. Vincent -- 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.
[sage-devel] Sage.app binary problems
I, just downloaded the Sage.app (OSX 10.9) from 2 different server and the resulting downloads didn't give the Sage.app, but simply the src Maybe theres a problems? -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Viviane Pons wrote: > As a "yes" voter, I would be totally in favor of changing the name to > "guidelines". As Nathann pointed out, we're not Django or Fedora and even > though they can be source of inspiration, we don't have to do something just > because they do. Also, the linguistic debate about what "code" means is a > bit pointless: let's just use a word that most people agree on whatever > mother tongue they come from. > > I'm also in favor of voting a new text that carries more people on. I think > we're in a bad situation now, with a vote that not everybody recognizes and > divides the community. I am in favor of some kind of "code of conduct" but > dividing the community is counter productive. Agreed. Most everybody would consider it a very positive outcome if there were a replacement "thing of conduct" that addresses the concerns many people have raised and gets passed almost unanimously. I really hope that happens. I'm really appreciative of Dima, Nathann, you and others who are continuing to put effort and thought into this so that such a thing can happen. -- William > > Best > > Viviane > > -- > 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. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington 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 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
As a "yes" voter, I would be totally in favor of changing the name to "guidelines". As Nathann pointed out, we're not Django or Fedora and even though they can be source of inspiration, we don't have to do something just because they do. Also, the linguistic debate about what "code" means is a bit pointless: let's just use a word that most people agree on whatever mother tongue they come from. I'm also in favor of voting a new text that carries more people on. I think we're in a bad situation now, with a vote that not everybody recognizes and divides the community. I am in favor of some kind of "code of conduct" but dividing the community is counter productive. Best Viviane -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:08:47AM -0800, Jakob Kroeker wrote: >Question 1: who of the initial 'yes' voters would insist to keep the >term 'code of conduct' >Question 2: who of the initial 'No' voters would accept the term >'guidelines' instead with content as is >Question 3: who would accept the term 'guidelines' and also insist on >changing the content of the behaviour guidelines Ah, thanks for running this poll! I have been meaning to do it, but did not get the time; it indeed feels like that the discussion is going in round when there is a rather clear consensus emerging. As I said earlier, I'd be very fine with guidelines, or any variant that would not make our friends uncomfortable because of a potential confusion with law. Etiquette (sagiquette?) is quite fine too as it relates to well established traditions on the net; not only because it's french :-) I have no strong opinion on the specific content. Cheers, Nicolas -- Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On 2014-11-28, Volker Braun wrote: > --=_Part_6745_1715951226.1417191747103 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="=_Part_6746_1434359819.1417191747103" > > --=_Part_6746_1434359819.1417191747103 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Let me try a last time, just replace code with book: If you want to understand how I feel about that name, add to that doc a subtitle "Mein Kampf" :-) -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
> Let me try a last time, just replace code with book: We will never understand. Give it up ! It is unfortunate, but to us "code" is associated with "law". 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Let me try a last time, just replace code with book: A book of laws is a book, but not every book is a book of laws. On Friday, November 28, 2014 4:12:47 PM UTC, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > > No, there is no association beyond the codified = written down. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_code > > This is the kind of association we all have in mind. > > 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
> No, there is no association beyond the codified = written down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_code This is the kind of association we all have in mind. 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Friday, November 28, 2014 3:02:24 PM UTC, Simon King wrote: > > Unfortunately that is exactly what is not the problem here. The > association of "code of conduct" with codified law exists in English > No, there is no association beyond the codified = written down. Of course the writing down part that is in "code of law". I'll leave it as an exercise to identify "code of ..." in English that are not enforcable laws. -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On 2014-11-28, William Stein wrote: > --001a1140e10cc7331a0508ecdbd1 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On Nov 28, 2014 7:17 AM, "Simon King" wrote: >> >> Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 16:06:55 UTC+1 schrieb William: >>> >>> > Could someone please answer the question about further proceeding (I > asked twice already): Do I understand correctly that there will be some > editing on http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct before publishing the > code of conduct or the guidelines or etiquette or whatever it will > eventually be called? For how long? >>> > >>> >>> No. The original text is what was voted on. Anybody can edit the wiki > and a new conduct thing could be proposed and voted on later. >> >> >> I see. That's the old trick of putting something on vote while it is > still discussed. As a result, some people don't realise that the vote is > exactly about the current state, and that one shouldn't vote "yes" but "no" > if one just likes the basic idea but finds the current state sub-optimal. >> > > Please reread my statement at the beginning of the vote thread before > claiming I tricked you. It begins " > This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of conduct.". It should have been abundantly clear to everyone that the discussion was very much ongoing. Why should it have been interrupted in such a blunt manner? It was no ordinary question like whether to include bla.foo as an optional package in Sage. I hold that this was a violation of the very code the vote was about, in spirit if not in letter. Therefore the whole thing should be redone. I also hold that I feel bullied by that code, to begin with. Dima -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 16:24:37 UTC+1 schrieb William: > > > I see. That's the old trick of putting something on vote while it is > still discussed. As a result, some people don't realise that the vote is > exactly about the current state, and that one shouldn't vote "yes" but "no" > if one just likes the basic idea but finds the current state sub-optimal. > > > > Please reread my statement at the beginning of the vote thread before > claiming I tricked you. It begins " > This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of > conduct.". > I did not doubt that you wrote what the vote is about. But it is still what I'd call it a trick. -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Nov 28, 2014 7:17 AM, "Simon King" wrote: > > Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 16:06:55 UTC+1 schrieb William: >> >> > Could someone please answer the question about further proceeding (I asked twice already): Do I understand correctly that there will be some editing on http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct before publishing the code of conduct or the guidelines or etiquette or whatever it will eventually be called? For how long? >> > >> >> No. The original text is what was voted on. Anybody can edit the wiki and a new conduct thing could be proposed and voted on later. > > > I see. That's the old trick of putting something on vote while it is still discussed. As a result, some people don't realise that the vote is exactly about the current state, and that one shouldn't vote "yes" but "no" if one just likes the basic idea but finds the current state sub-optimal. > Please reread my statement at the beginning of the vote thread before claiming I tricked you. It begins " This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of conduct.". > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 16:06:55 UTC+1 schrieb William: > > > Could someone please answer the question about further proceeding (I > asked twice already): Do I understand correctly that there will be some > editing on http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct before publishing the > code of conduct or the guidelines or etiquette or whatever it will > eventually be called? For how long? > > > > No. The original text is what was voted on. Anybody can edit the wiki and > a new conduct thing could be proposed and voted on later. > I see. That's the old trick of putting something on vote while it is still discussed. As a result, some people don't realise that the vote is exactly about the current state, and that one shouldn't vote "yes" but "no" if one just likes the basic idea but finds the current state sub-optimal. -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Yooo ! > Sorry, I first didn't see your reply. I am not sure about the common > etiquette for wiki pages. Yes, I agree that it is messy. I think that we should feel free to edit whatever we like (while trying to respect the spirit somehow) otherwise we will keep adding stuff from fear of changing somebody else's text ^^; > In any case, after editing the text of the code of > conduct directly, I reverted the change and then requested changes in the > "Alternatives" section. By coincidence, right beside your "paragraph" > block... They seem to coexist well right now. Good evening ! ;-) 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Nathann, Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 15:11:30 UTC+1 schrieb Nathann Cohen: > > Hello ! > > > Will this be done by editing http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct or > > will a separate document be created? > > I guess the situations is already sufficiently chaotic as it is :-P I > added the paragraph block to that page: > http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct > > Whoever wants can modify it of course. > Sorry, I first didn't see your reply. I am not sure about the common etiquette for wiki pages. In any case, after editing the text of the code of conduct directly, I reverted the change and then requested changes in the "Alternatives" section. By coincidence, right beside your "paragraph" block... Best regards, Simon -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Nov 28, 2014 7:02 AM, "Simon King" wrote: > > Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 15:44:08 UTC+1 schrieb Volker Braun: >> >> On Friday, November 28, 2014 1:09:38 PM UTC, Nathann Cohen wrote: >>> >>> I have no idea on earth what you are talking about. If you need >>> frenglish lessons I can give you some. It is very simple: just speak >>> french with an english accent. Of course most words will not >>> translate, but you have to keep a poker face all along. >> >> >> That is exactly what I meant ;-) > > > Unfortunately that is exactly what is not the problem here. The association of "code of conduct" with codified law exists in English, whether you want it or not. In contrast to previous problems in the recent threads, it is not an artefact of a reverse translation. > > Could someone please answer the question about further proceeding (I asked twice already): Do I understand correctly that there will be some editing on http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct before publishing the code of conduct or the guidelines or etiquette or whatever it will eventually be called? For how long? > No. The original text is what was voted on. Anybody can edit the wiki and a new conduct thing could be proposed and voted on later. > And *how* should the editing be done? By editing the text itself? By adding requests for changes to the section "Alternatives"? Earlier today, I did the former (sorry if that was wrong), but then I thought it'd be better to preserve the original text for reference, and did the latter instead. > > Best regards, > Simon > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
I definitely like the idea of "guidelines" over "code of conduct". El viernes, 28 de noviembre de 2014 15:08:48 UTC+1, Jakob Kroeker escribió: > > As already mentioned by others, the bad thing (at least from my point of > view) is that the 'code of conduct' splits the community. > To reduce the dissonance among us we could agree on something with broader > support. > Otherwise I hope that this discussion will end at some point, and I will > try to forget and fade out that there was > this discussion at all and that there is a 'code of conduct' > > Jakob > > Question 1: who of the initial 'yes' voters would insist to keep the term > 'code of conduct' > Question 2: who of the initial 'No' voters would accept the term > 'guidelines' instead with content as is > Question 3: who would accept the term 'guidelines' and also insist on > changing the content of the behaviour guidelines > > Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 14:09:38 UTC+1 schrieb Nathann Cohen: >> >> > I welcome your enthusiasm but please can we stick to established >> nomenclature? >> > If you insist on not calling it "Code" then please also >> > explain why Fedora and Django have made a mistake in naming it. >> >> O_o >> >> Dear friend, I am getting slowly convinced that one of us is crazy. >> Assuming, as I cannot disprove it, that I am the crazy one, I will >> answer your question: >> >> I cannot explain why Fedora or Django did differently, simply because >> I do not know them. I have no idea what they do, how they work, or if >> they have psychiatric problems. If we have to explain, for whatever we >> do, why Fedora and Django did differently, we just can't take any >> decision by ourselves. Unless you take them for us, of course. I >> strongly believe that I am not the only one here who has no clue about >> why Fedora and Django are great, and an example we should follow. >> >> One very disturbing thing I noticed about Fedora and Django is that >> they do not even seem to write mathematical code. I do not know what >> to think about that. >> >> > A document >> > that you first need to reverse-translate from Frenglish to French to >> English >> > to understand is not helpful. >> >> I have no idea on earth what you are talking about. If you need >> frenglish lessons I can give you some. It is very simple: just speak >> french with an english accent. Of course most words will not >> translate, but you have to keep a poker face all along. >> >> 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 15:44:08 UTC+1 schrieb Volker Braun: > > On Friday, November 28, 2014 1:09:38 PM UTC, Nathann Cohen wrote: >> >> I have no idea on earth what you are talking about. If you need >> frenglish lessons I can give you some. It is very simple: just speak >> french with an english accent. Of course most words will not >> translate, but you have to keep a poker face all along. > > > That is exactly what I meant ;-) > Unfortunately that is exactly what is not the problem here. The association of "code of conduct" with codified law exists in English, whether you want it or not. In contrast to previous problems in the recent threads, it is not an artefact of a reverse translation. Could someone please answer the question about further proceeding (I asked twice already): Do I understand correctly that there will be some editing on http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct before publishing the code of conduct or the guidelines or etiquette or whatever it will eventually be called? For how long? And *how* should the editing be done? By editing the text itself? By adding requests for changes to the section "Alternatives"? Earlier today, I did the former (sorry if that was wrong), but then I thought it'd be better to preserve the original text for reference, and did the latter instead. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Friday, November 28, 2014 1:09:38 PM UTC, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > I have no idea on earth what you are talking about. If you need > frenglish lessons I can give you some. It is very simple: just speak > french with an english accent. Of course most words will not > translate, but you have to keep a poker face all along. That is exactly what I meant ;-) -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi! Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 15:08:48 UTC+1 schrieb Jakob Kroeker: > > Question 1: who of the initial 'yes' voters would insist to keep the term > 'code of conduct' > Question 2: who of the initial 'No' voters would accept the term > 'guidelines' instead with content as is > Question 3: who would accept the term 'guidelines' and also insist on > changing the content of the behaviour guidelines > I would accept the term "guidelines". As I have pointed out above by reference to an American English dictionary, "code of conduct" clearly seems to have the connotation of codified law, and I don't want that. Concerning the content: The guidelines should also say something about its use, respectively should make it as difficult as possible to misuse the guidelines. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hello ! > Will this be done by editing http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct or > will a separate document be created? I guess the situations is already sufficiently chaotic as it is :-P I added the paragraph block to that page: http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct Whoever wants can modify it of course. 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
As already mentioned by others, the bad thing (at least from my point of view) is that the 'code of conduct' splits the community. To reduce the dissonance among us we could agree on something with broader support. Otherwise I hope that this discussion will end at some point, and I will try to forget and fade out that there was this discussion at all and that there is a 'code of conduct' Jakob Question 1: who of the initial 'yes' voters would insist to keep the term 'code of conduct' Question 2: who of the initial 'No' voters would accept the term 'guidelines' instead with content as is Question 3: who would accept the term 'guidelines' and also insist on changing the content of the behaviour guidelines Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 14:09:38 UTC+1 schrieb Nathann Cohen: > > > I welcome your enthusiasm but please can we stick to established > nomenclature? > > If you insist on not calling it "Code" then please also > > explain why Fedora and Django have made a mistake in naming it. > > O_o > > Dear friend, I am getting slowly convinced that one of us is crazy. > Assuming, as I cannot disprove it, that I am the crazy one, I will > answer your question: > > I cannot explain why Fedora or Django did differently, simply because > I do not know them. I have no idea what they do, how they work, or if > they have psychiatric problems. If we have to explain, for whatever we > do, why Fedora and Django did differently, we just can't take any > decision by ourselves. Unless you take them for us, of course. I > strongly believe that I am not the only one here who has no clue about > why Fedora and Django are great, and an example we should follow. > > One very disturbing thing I noticed about Fedora and Django is that > they do not even seem to write mathematical code. I do not know what > to think about that. > > > A document > > that you first need to reverse-translate from Frenglish to French to > English > > to understand is not helpful. > > I have no idea on earth what you are talking about. If you need > frenglish lessons I can give you some. It is very simple: just speak > french with an english accent. Of course most words will not > translate, but you have to keep a poker face all along. > > 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 13:39:51 UTC+1 schrieb Volker Braun: > > On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:23 AM UTC, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > I think that it is a good clause, and I hope that the document to which it >> could eventually belong will be a "Guidelines" one and not a code. > > > I welcome your enthusiasm but please can we stick to established > nomenclature? If you insist on not calling it "Code" then please also > explain why Fedora and Django have made a mistake in naming it. A document > that you first need to reverse-translate from Frenglish to French to > English to understand is not helpful. > There is a wonderful term of French origin for what I think it is all about: Etiquette. Why not use this? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/etiquette http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/code -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] coeffs() & coefficients()
Hi, if it can help, here are two remarks: First, P.coeffs does not shortcut anything compared to P.coefficients because we have tab completion. It even slows things down: if i want coefficients, i will write P.coe and then it will not auto-complete fully because coeffs adds a breaking node between P.coe and P.coefficients (and symmetrically) so actually removing P.coeffs will speed things up. Second, from the new user point of view, the method is called coefficients not nonzero_coefficients so people use it the straightforward way and since it works on most tested example, they will not go further in reading the doc. I have observed the problem with coefficients default behaviour some times already, see for example : http://ask.sagemath.org/question/23920/polynomial-in-gfp2/?answer=23922#post-id-23922 The main issue here is that it somehow "fails silently". A common workflow is to tab-complete for what you are looking for, if something with the right name appears, try it and use it if it works, look at the documentation only if your example did not work as expected. A test polynomial basically looks like 1+2*x+5*x^3 tried with second coeff, unlikely 1+2*x^4. Note that everything is already coded as P.dict(), P.__getitem__() and P.__iter__() so the main question is about visibility and accessibility. A newcommer is unlikely to look at the P.dict() method while tab-completing (even less P.__getitem__([2,3]) nor P([2,3])), while the word "coefficients" immediately makes sense and deserves having a try. If i had two gifts "coefficients" and "dict" to offer to a developper and a newcommer, it is not clear i would have done the current choice, newcomers are not subscribed to sage-devel however. By the way, i found 'nonzero' much easier to understand than 'sparse' in this context. Ciao, Thierry On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:06:31PM -0800, john_perry_usm wrote: > Hello Sages > > Last week (?) I noticed that a program I wrote was making a mistake, > because f.coeffs() and f.coefficients() return very different results: the > former provides a dense representation (with 0's), the second a sparse one > (no 0's, correlating with f.exponents()). > > I like this OK, but the help string isn't clear on this: the latter states > merely, "Return the coefficients of the monomials appearing in self;" while > the former states, "Returns "self.list()." " The help on self.list() states > merely, "Returns a list with the coefficients of self." > > So the difference is that one states "monomials *appearing* in self," while > the other does not clarify that it gives the monomials appearing in self, > which presumably means it includes monomials *not* appearing in self. I'm > not good at these kinds of inferences, so this does not immediately convey > "dense" or "sparse representation," or not to me, anyway. > > I would propose the following: > > *f.coeffs?* should state something to the effect of, "Returns all the > coefficients of a dense representation of f." > > *f.coefficients?* should state something like, "Returns all the > coefficients of a sparse representation of f; that is, it returns only the > non-zero coefficients, in a list correlated with f.exponents." (Notice the > explicit statement of the correlation, reinforcing sparse representation.) > > *f.list?* should be mostly identical to f.coeffs? > > I'm willing to open a ticket & author a patch to this effect, if at least > one other person agrees here. > > 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. -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
> I welcome your enthusiasm but please can we stick to established nomenclature? > If you insist on not calling it "Code" then please also > explain why Fedora and Django have made a mistake in naming it. O_o Dear friend, I am getting slowly convinced that one of us is crazy. Assuming, as I cannot disprove it, that I am the crazy one, I will answer your question: I cannot explain why Fedora or Django did differently, simply because I do not know them. I have no idea what they do, how they work, or if they have psychiatric problems. If we have to explain, for whatever we do, why Fedora and Django did differently, we just can't take any decision by ourselves. Unless you take them for us, of course. I strongly believe that I am not the only one here who has no clue about why Fedora and Django are great, and an example we should follow. One very disturbing thing I noticed about Fedora and Django is that they do not even seem to write mathematical code. I do not know what to think about that. > A document > that you first need to reverse-translate from Frenglish to French to English > to understand is not helpful. I have no idea on earth what you are talking about. If you need frenglish lessons I can give you some. It is very simple: just speak french with an english accent. Of course most words will not translate, but you have to keep a poker face all along. 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi Volker, On 2014-11-28, Volker Braun wrote: >> I think that it is a good clause, and I hope that the document to which it >> could eventually belong will be a "Guidelines" one and not a code. > > > I welcome your enthusiasm but please can we stick to established > nomenclature? If you insist on not calling it "Code" then please also > explain why Fedora and Django have made a mistake in naming it. It is not our job to teach Fedora and Django. > A document > that you first need to reverse-translate from Frenglish to French to > English to understand is not helpful. On https://www.wordnik.com/words/code, the first mentioned meaning of the word "code" is: A systematically arranged and comprehensive collection of laws. The second mentioned meaning is: A systematic collection of regulations and rules of procedure or conduct: a traffic code. Both meanings are taken from The American (sic!) Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition. So, you see that the expression "code of conduct" undoubtedly has connotations (even in American English, not only in French!) that some of us refuse to adopt. In fact, given the above dictionary entries, it seems unlikely to me that a native speaker would *not* associate a "code of conduct" with "codified law". Best regards, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:23 AM UTC, Nathann Cohen wrote: > I think that it is a good clause, and I hope that the document to which it > could eventually belong will be a "Guidelines" one and not a code. I welcome your enthusiasm but please can we stick to established nomenclature? If you insist on not calling it "Code" then please also explain why Fedora and Django have made a mistake in naming it. A document that you first need to reverse-translate from Frenglish to French to English to understand is not helpful. -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: proposed amendment to code of conduct
Hi John, hi all, On 2014-11-26, john_perry_usm wrote: > At least two of us who voted against the Code of Conduct think it a good > idea to amend with a clause to the following effect: > > On the other hand, we have to remember that the very fact that Sage >> developers come from different cultures, backgrounds, and social circles, >> means we each have different customs of expression. Vigorous arguments on >> technical questions, even when characterized by sharp disagreement and >> legitimate criticism, is a sign of a healthy community, and not a hostile >> environment *per se*. While it is important to be sensitive, it is no >> less important to avoid oversensitivity. Will this be done by editing http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct or will a separate document be created? Best regards, Simon -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Slow Poset creation and UniqueRepresentation
Hello ! > How can that be? Isn't generally the test by "==" first checking whether > the two arguments are identical, before calling `.__eq__`? > > If python does not do it automatically, then at least in your example it > would be good to make g.__eq__ use the "self is other" test, before > doing anything expensive. Probably the problem would also be solved by > implementing rich comparison via __richcmp__ (not sure though). DiGraph comparison is slower than it should be for sure. I already have plans to change that, even though I fear the messy code as I will have to deal with the usual multiedges/edge labels/loops subcases (and their combinations). I should also add the "self is other" test, but that would not change this example: the code computes a Hasse Diagram from g, and this second digraph is used as a parameter of Poset. Thus a comparison will be necessary anyway (g is not even immutable). > In any case, if there is a reason to have unique representation, then > ideally the defining data should be easy to compare. Evidently, a > dictionary lookup has to be involved for any kind of unique > represenation. I agree. I think that I can make DiGraph equality faster [1], but it will not be magic either. Testing equality of graphs will never be free, and I do think that there should be a way to not pay it if you see no need to. Nathann [1] especially in the very very very specific case of the digraphs used by posets -- 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.
[sage-devel] Publication of code of conduct?
Hi! Do I understand correctly that http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct is open for editing for a while, before making the code of conduct official? How long will this take? Best regards, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Re: Slow Poset creation and UniqueRepresentation
Hi Nathann, On 2014-11-28, Nathann Cohen wrote: > sage: g = posets.BooleanLattice(5).hasse_diagram().transitive_closure(); > sage: g = g.cartesian_product(g) > sage: %time Poset(g) > CPU times: user 284 ms, sys: 32 ms, total: 316 ms > Wall time: 278 ms > Finite poset containing 1024 elements > sage: %time Poset(g) > CPU times: user 1.63 s, sys: 44 ms, total: 1.68 s > Wall time: 1.61 s > Finite poset containing 1024 elements > > Even without my optimisations you see this effect, and I am pretty sure > that the huge time penalty here is because Poset inherits from > UniqueRepresentation. Profiling shows that most of the time is spent > testing equality of posets, which is part of the UniqueRepresentation > initialization. You mean the comparison of g with itself takes so much time? Hard to believe, but it really seems to be the case: sage: g = posets.BooleanLattice(5).hasse_diagram().transitive_closure() sage: g = g.cartesian_product(g) sage: %timeit g==g 1 loops, best of 3: 10.3 s per loop How can that be? Isn't generally the test by "==" first checking whether the two arguments are identical, before calling `.__eq__`? If python does not do it automatically, then at least in your example it would be good to make g.__eq__ use the "self is other" test, before doing anything expensive. Probably the problem would also be solved by implementing rich comparison via __richcmp__ (not sure though). In any case, if there is a reason to have unique representation, then ideally the defining data should be easy to compare. Evidently, a dictionary lookup has to be involved for any kind of unique represenation. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: When/by who/how was the "code of conduct" initiated ?
Hi! Am Freitag, 28. November 2014 04:26:44 UTC+1 schrieb Andrew: > > > I think we can discuss code and ideas without being rude. If I receive a >> rude comment, I have neither the energy nor the time to find the ideas in >> it, and I shouldn't have to do it (and neither should you). >> > > +1 > If a substantial part of our community would share that attitude, we'd be in serious trouble, I am afraid. For creating a conflict, it is in some cases sufficient to have a single person who had have a bad day or didn't sleep enough, causing a temporary misjudgement. However, for keeping a conflict boiling, it is in all cases necessary to have several people who are committing continued misjudgements. And that's what the mentioned attitude achieves. And unfortunately, a code of conduct can not prevent a temporary misjudgement, but it may encourage the mentioned attitude, making conflicts a lot more violent. In other words, if you are able to see a legitimate request behind a wall of behaviour that seems inappropriate to you, then you should answer that request. It is fine if you are not able to, but then please don't answer at all. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
[sage-devel] Slow Poset creation and UniqueRepresentation
Hello everybody ! I have come across what seems to be a problem with Poset and UniqueRepresentation. After an optimization branch I just wrote (#17408), this is what costs the most time when you build a Poset. Look at this: sage: g = posets.BooleanLattice(5).hasse_diagram().transitive_closure(); sage: g = g.cartesian_product(g) sage: %time Poset(g) CPU times: user 284 ms, sys: 32 ms, total: 316 ms Wall time: 278 ms Finite poset containing 1024 elements sage: %time Poset(g) CPU times: user 1.63 s, sys: 44 ms, total: 1.68 s Wall time: 1.61 s Finite poset containing 1024 elements Even without my optimisations you see this effect, and I am pretty sure that the huge time penalty here is because Poset inherits from UniqueRepresentation. Profiling shows that most of the time is spent testing equality of posets, which is part of the UniqueRepresentation initialization. Can anyone see another posible cause for this or, more importantly, a way to fix it? Thanks, 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.
[sage-devel] Re: When/by who/how was the "code of conduct" initiated ?
> > > I feel that it is not something so uncommon. As Volker said, many other > > communities have some thing like this ... > > ... pirates had it, too. > > 'the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules' - Captain Barbossa -- 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.
