[sage-combinat-devel] sage-combinat move to git
Dear Sage-combinat developers, As most of you are probably aware of, the Sage development will soon change from hg to git. At the same time, the sage-combinat queue will need to be transformed into git branches. Most likely, this will mean a more shallow structure (rather than a linear queue) with parallel projects. We are going to discuss this change on Tuesday during Sage Days 54 in Davis. If you have any comments or suggestions, let us know! Best, Anne -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [sage-combinat-devel] sage-combinat move to git
Hi! Here is an initial list of discussion points regarding the Sage-combinat queue: - Should we use a fork for sage-combinat? Or branches for the various patches or projects? * If we do use a fork, how to sync the combinat fork with the main sage fork? In particular, once branches are merged in the main fork, can they merge in the fork as well? * If we don't fork, then is there some way we can tie all of the combinat branches together? Specifically can we list all branches which don't have ticket numbers. Is there an automatic way to remove a sage-combinat branch once it has been merged into main sage? - How do we transform the queue into git branches, how do we handle dependencies? - When will the change occur? * Will we freeze the hg queue at that point? * Where will we host the new combinat branches? - Will it be easy to switch between branches (like experimental code, branches to be reviewed etc)? Let us know if you have anything else to add. Anne and Travis On 11/3/13 8:27 AM, Anne Schilling wrote: Dear Sage-combinat developers, As most of you are probably aware of, the Sage development will soon change from hg to git. At the same time, the sage-combinat queue will need to be transformed into git branches. Most likely, this will mean a more shallow structure (rather than a linear queue) with parallel projects. We are going to discuss this change on Tuesday during Sage Days 54 in Davis. If you have any comments or suggestions, let us know! Best, Anne -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Fwd: Re: [sage-combinat-devel] sage-combinat move to git
From Dan Bump: Hi Anne, I'm not cc:ing the google group since I don't think I'm authorized to post from this email address. But I'm cc:ing Andrew and Travis. I am in Davis now. Greg Musicker was arriving on the shuttle as I got back from dinner. Here is a link to my slides: http://sporadic.stanford.edu/bump/Gittalk.pdf - Should we use a fork for sage-combinat? Or branches for the various patches or projects? It seems to me that a fork would be a bad idea if it can possibly be avoided. Maybe what would work would be to have a second combinat repository. This would have to be rebased this regularly with the main sage repository. Maybe the master branches would be identical. In other words, someone would rebase the master branch on the combinat repository with the master branch on the main repository. This would not be difficult, maybe it could be automated. But the combinat repo would have many branches, and rebasing these would be the responsibility of their owners. So there would be two main repositories: sage-main -- sage-combinat (with many branches) and the master branch would have to be frequently rebased. Patches in the current combinat mercurial queue would correspond to branches on the combinat repository, and every branch would have to be rebased regularly to keep up with changes on the sage-main master branch. But this would be the responsibility of the patch owner, not the release manager, so the work would be distributed. And because the patches would no longer be deeply nested it would be less difficult. * If we don't fork, then is there some way we can tie all of the combinat branches together? Specifically can we list all branches which don't have ticket numbers. Is there an automatic way to remove a sage-combinat branch once it has been merged into main sage? This should not be a problem. Dan -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [sage-combinat-devel] sage-combinat move to git
Hi Dan, Thank you for your comments. We will discuss this more on Tuesday. It seems to me that a fork would be a bad idea if it can possibly be avoided. I agree, especially if the aim is to merge the branches eventually with sage-main rather than having a separate project. Travis brought up the idea of forks. Maybe what would work would be to have a second combinat repository. This would have to be rebased this regularly with the main sage repository. Maybe the master branches would be identical. In other words, someone would rebase the master branch on the combinat repository with the master branch on the main repository. This would not be difficult, maybe it could be automated. But the combinat repo would have many branches, and rebasing these would be the responsibility of their owners. If there is a branch on partitions and a branch on tableaux, someone might be interested in merging them. So I guess we could also keep merged branches in the combinat repository. I discussed some of these issues already tonight with Mike and Mathieu and we seem mostly in agreement on what to do. Best, Anne -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
