from:"David Lowry"

Re: [sage-devel] VOTE: Use "CI Fix" label for merging into continuous integration runs

2024-03-08 Thread David Lowry-Duda

- DLD

On 03:43 Mon 04 Mar 2024, David Roe wrote:

The following proposal has been made several times the last few weeks: in
PR #37428 <https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/37428>, in this thread
<https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/uWHaWK7b6H4> and then in this
thread <https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/XDvKkMRoDk4>. It is
orthogonal to the ongoing vote in this thread
<https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/E0qfJTMETDk>. With no further
discussion, I'm calling a vote.

*Background*

Starting in Sage 10.2, PRs with the Blocker label have been merged into all
other PRs before running CI; see the changelog
<https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/Sage-10.2-Release-Tour#open-blocker-prs-are-applied-automatically-in-ci-workflows>
and this post
<https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/uWHaWK7b6H4/m/cM77D8E5AAAJ> for
more details. This has led to disagreements about whether this label
should be applied.

*Proposal*
We use "CI Fix" rather than Blocker to determine whether an open PR should
be merged before running CI. Blocker will retain its previous meaning of a
PR that should be merged before the next release is finished. The process
below describes how to resolve disagreements about whether the "CI Fix"
label should be applied.
a. Only PRs with positive review should be marked with the "CI Fix" label.
This should be done if both author and reviewer agree that it is
appropriate, and a rationale should be given in a comment on the ticket.
b. If a PR becomes disputed (as described in this proposal
<https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/IgBYUJl33SQ>), the "CI Fix"
status can be voted on separately upon request; otherwise it should be
applied if and only if positive review is applied.

Voting will be open until Wednesday, March 13.
David

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAChs6_mYLUWXMU6AZKJGPKd2oz0AC_qAUjnGoD9Q9yixzNBC2w%40mail.gmail.com.

--
David Lowry-Duda

Re: [sage-devel] VOTE: disputed PRs

2024-03-08 Thread David Lowry-Duda

- DLD

On 03:23 Mon 04 Mar 2024, David Roe wrote:

With no further discussion on this thread
<https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/XDvKkMRoDk4>, I'm calling a vote
on a new process for resolving disagreements on a PR.

*Proposal*
It is now allowed to vote on disputed PRs directly on Github rather than
bringing them to sage-devel. Working things out amicably is preferable,
and anyone is welcome to ask on sage-devel for more eyes on a PR. If you
notice a serious issue with a PR, it is acceptable to change it to Needs
Work (and make a comment!) as an initial step, but if the author or
reviewer do not agree then process below should be followed instead. This
process is intended as a lower-intensity method for resolving
disagreements, and full votes on sage-devel override the process described
below.
a. When there is disagreement about whether a PR should be merged, anyone
may mark a PR as disputed.
b. There is no scheduled vote, but rather an ongoing poll based on opinions
expressed by developers on the PR (these opinions can be expressed via
previous positive reviews or explicit comments giving approval). The PR
author is presumed to vote in favor; if they give up or no longer favor the
PR they have the right to close the PR overall without any further voting.
c. If the total number of positive votes is at least twice the number of
negative votes, anyone involved may set the status to *positive review*; if
the total number of positive votes is less than twice the number of
negative votes, anyone involved may set the status to *needs review*. When
either of these actions is taken, the person changing the status must list
the people they are counting as positive and negative votes in a comment
using @ mentions.
d. The final decision on merging a disputed PR remains with the release
manager, and we encourage the release manager to give enough time for
everyone to express an opinion.

Voting will be open until Wednesday, March 13.
David

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAChs6_n4az3_s16E%3DANOv_o%2B0SvavHwnpqKWYuOznGWTJoXqEg%40mail.gmail.com.

--
David Lowry-Duda

Re: [sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

2024-02-12 Thread David Lowry-Duda


On 22:42 Sun 11 Feb 2024, Matthias Koeppe wrote:

*2. Is our community aware of the sagemath/sage GitHub wiki?*
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki
- Are the contents of the wiki front page useful?


I think the existence of two wikis (i.e. the github wiki and 
https://wiki.sagemath.org/) is confusing.

- DLD

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/ZcpeOwLOBAUzDUOL%40icerm-dld.

Re: [sage-devel] sage is slowding down PARI/GP by factor x2 (roughly)

2022-12-16 Thread David Lowry-Duda


On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:19:28PM +, Dima Pasechnik wrote:

On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:05 PM John Cremona  wrote:


A propos, which Sage developers will be in Luminy for the COUNT
meeting?  I will.


I'm still waiting to hear from them. Or perhaps they don't notify
people who haven't made it on the list, I have no idea.
I should form a 1-person union and declare myself on strike w.r.t.,
quoting their announcement,  "informal collaboration and for coding
projects related to PARI/GP, SageMath,..." :-)

Dima


I'm also waiting to hear from them. But in principle, I'd like to be 
there too.


- DLD

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/Y5yjk1mCDBY9kkIL%40icerm-dld.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: move Sage development to Github

2022-09-21 Thread David Lowry-Duda


+1 for Github

--
David Lowry-Duda  

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/YytVnDn7V6CuCzSg%40icerm-dld.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Docstring Formatting Question: Bullet Points

2022-07-11 Thread David Lowry-Duda


On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 4:57:39 PM UTC-7 Travis Scrimshaw wrote:

Right now there are two conventions throughout Sage for bullet points (and
similar things). Someone has been systematically trying to change
everything to one convention (which I am opposed to). However, we as a
community have not had a discussion about this as far as I am aware (I
believe also changing the example doc page at some point). I figured we
should have this conversion now.

The question is this: Should there be blanklines between bullet 
points?


I am content with continuing to allow both spaced lists with newlines 
and tight lists without newlines. Sage follows sphinx here, and sphinx 
follows rst (as in the spec [1]).


[1]: 
https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtext.html#bullet-lists

On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 06:57:05PM -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote:

In https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30448, I propose to add a linting tool
for our docstrings. I haven't checked whether it has an opinion on the 
style question that you asked (I don't), but I have already found (and 
fixed) some mistakes in the markup in some files using it.


I've used flake8-rst-docstrings before and it also allows both tight and 
loose list syntax by default. I don't think there is a way to choose one 
style over the other.


- DLD

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/Yszde1dU9tjFYA/J%40icerm-dld.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Remove sagenb documentation from the reference manual?

2018-10-15 Thread David Lowry

+1 to the proposal. I think it may be a good idea to have only a brief 
statement about how to convert sws --> ipynb, so that when those who 
currently use sagenb will find transitioning to more up-to-date versions of 
sage simpler.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Online Sage Days

2017-11-15 Thread David Lowry

I missed the earlier comments in this thread, but I'm interested in 
principle. I wonder if the largest problem was simply visibility?

On Wednesday, November 15, 2017 at 9:03:52 PM UTC, David Roe wrote:
>
> I'd be happy to continue, but only a few people signed up on the 
> scheduling poll, then nobody else participated.  I'm guessing that part of 
> the problem is that we're getting toward the end of the semester.  For 
> people who would like to participate in principle, what are the obstacles?  
> When would a better time be?
> David
>
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 3:47 PM, saad khalid  > wrote:
>
>> Will these be continuing at all? I would love to be a part of this, 
>> especially if it were in early January or something. 
>>
>> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 4:05:02 AM UTC-5, David Roe wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> I'd like to organize some online Sage Days, where people gather on 
>>> zulip.sagemath.org and work on Sage together.  The two things to be 
>>> decided are 
>>> 1. What topics should we focus on?
>>> 2. What days/times work for the most people?
>>> Some of these may transition into in-person working groups (the IMA has 
>>> funding for small groups to meet there over this coming year to work on 
>>> projects)
>>>
>>> I'll send out a survey for the scheduling part, but I wanted to solicit 
>>> suggestions for topics first.  Some ideas:
>>>
>>> * Python 3 Compatibility
>>> * Work on documentation tickets, discuss overall documentation 
>>> structure, make docbuilding more robust
>>> * Sage Infrastructure (improving the patchbot; common login for trac, 
>>> github, google, zulip using OAuth; investigate options for in-line code 
>>> review)
>>> * Sage's packaging and build system
>>> * Infrastructure for more random testing, speed regression testing
>>> * Interacts and interactive mathematics
>>> * Comparing Magma and Sage
>>> * Additional interfaces (Macaulay2)
>>>
>>> And on the mathematical side:
>>> * p-adics
>>> * function fields
>>> * linear algebra
>>> * modular forms
>>> * representation theory
>>> * polyhedral geometry
>>> * Coxeter group/root systems and braid groups
>>> * Schubert polynomials
>>>
>>> If you'd like me to include other topics in the survey, chime in!
>>> David
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "sage-devel" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: openBlas compile error