[sage-combinat-devel] Re: poll for making dot2tex a standard spkg
Salut Sébastien! On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 03:14:59AM -0700, Sébastien Labbé wrote: >Nicolas, can you describe the developement community which is behind >dot2tex. Is it only one guy? Is it a team? How is dot2tex maintained? Is >it a package that never needs fixes? >So in the future, will all the bug related to dot2tex be fixed in Sage >like in this example? Will we have problem with the upstream? That's a good question. dot2tex is developed and maintained by a single person. He used to be very reactive, but indeed not so much lately. So we should ask Kjell about his plans for the future of dot2tex. It would indeed be best if as much as possible was resolved upstream. That being said, dot2tex is relatively feature complete (we have been using it intensively and did not post a feature request in a long time), robust (one bug report per year?), and clear enough (on the occasions I had to dig in, I could easily find my way). So, altogether, maintaining dot2tex is probably a question of fixing a bug or two per year and cutting an official release from time to time. I am not volunteering to do that, but we could possibly find a volunteer in case Kjell would want to pass it on. Cheers, Nicolas -- Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[sage-combinat-devel] Re: poll for making dot2tex a standard spkg
> Description of dot2tex > -- Nicolas, can you describe the developement community which is behind dot2tex. Is it only one guy? Is it a team? How is dot2tex maintained? Is it a package that never needs fixes? At #13624, I got a problem with it and reported it upstream [2] last Fall. I got a quick acknowledgement and then silence. Finally the bug was fixed in another way by your patch at #13624 which needs review. Moreover, it seems that the bug will be fixed by #14382 which also needs review. [1] http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13624 [2] http://code.google.com/p/dot2tex/issues/detail?id=32 [3] http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14382 So in the future, will all the bug related to dot2tex be fixed in Sage like in this example? Will we have problem with the upstream? Anyway, I really like this dot2tex spkg, I use it a lot. If good warnings are printed if graphviz is needed and not installed, I agree to make it standard. Like we have code in Sage which are based on convert of ffmpeg : sage: a = animate([sin(x + float(k)) for k in srange(0,2*pi,0.3)],xmin=0, xmax=2*pi, figsize=[2,1]) sage: a.gif? ... Note: If neither ffmpeg nor ImageMagick is installed, you will get an error message like this: Error: Neither ImageMagick nor ffmpeg appears to be installed. Saving an animation to a GIF file or displaying an animation requires one of these packages, so please install one of them and try again. See www.imagemagick.org and www.ffmpeg.org for more information. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: poll for making dot2tex a standard spkg
On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 11:53:53 PM UTC+1, William wrote: > Yes, but EPL is GPL incompatible, so it can't be a standard package. > I agree, if just for license clarity: The default Sage tarball should be all GPL (-compatible). > Just to be clear -- are you making any proposal about what's in the > binaries that are distributed from sagemath.org, or just what gets > built when one downloads the source? I was thinking of both. Build from source + internet => build extras, with a separate build target to just build the standard source. I don't see why we shouldn't be able to distribute that as binary tarball either, its perfectly legal to distribute a GPL and a EPL binary in the same .tar.bz as long as they don't link to each other. That's what Linux distributions do, after all. But if somebody feels strongly against it then we can also distribute the binary builds without extras. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
