Re: [sage-devel] Re: SPKG Maintainers??
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 09:33:55 UTC-7, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 08:04:28 UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote: >> >> I am feeling inclined to open a trac ticket with the purpose of going >>> through everyhting I have written in the Sage library and making sure >>> that there's an AUTHOR block with my name on it wherever appropriate! >>> And if all current developers would do the same >>> >> >> We can do it semi-automatically: >> >> For every function that does not have an 'AUTHOR' block we can initialize >> one with the list of authors obtained from 'git blame' applied to this >> function. >> > > while this is silly, > I mean, having an AUTHOR block for every function in the source. But the following is not: > it's possible to write a Sage function which will provide such a list, by > analysing the history via 'git blame'. > (contrary to what several people on this thread seem to assume, git blame > can provide you full history...) > > Dima > > > >> >> Nathann >> >> P.S.: for me it is clearly a joke, and I would be alarmed if anybody >> thought that it actually makes sense. >> > -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 08:04:28 UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > I am feeling inclined to open a trac ticket with the purpose of going >> through everyhting I have written in the Sage library and making sure >> that there's an AUTHOR block with my name on it wherever appropriate! >> And if all current developers would do the same >> > > We can do it semi-automatically: > > For every function that does not have an 'AUTHOR' block we can initialize > one with the list of authors obtained from 'git blame' applied to this > function. > while this is silly, it's possible to write a Sage function which will provide such a list, by analysing the history via 'git blame'. (contrary to what several people on this thread seem to assume, git blame can provide you full history...) Dima > > Nathann > > P.S.: for me it is clearly a joke, and I would be alarmed if anybody > thought that it actually makes sense. > -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
> I am feeling inclined to open a trac ticket with the purpose of going >> through everyhting I have written in the Sage library and making sure >> that there's an AUTHOR block with my name on it wherever appropriate! >> And if all current developers would do the same >> > > We can do it semi-automatically: > > For every function that does not have an 'AUTHOR' block we can initialize > one with the list of authors obtained from 'git blame' applied to this > function. > > Nathann > > P.S.: for me it is clearly a joke, and I would be alarmed if anybody > thought that it actually makes sense. > But it would be so fun to review all those tickets! And they wouldn't overlap at all! -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
> > I am feeling inclined to open a trac ticket with the purpose of going > through everyhting I have written in the Sage library and making sure > that there's an AUTHOR block with my name on it wherever appropriate! > And if all current developers would do the same > We can do it semi-automatically: For every function that does not have an 'AUTHOR' block we can initialize one with the list of authors obtained from 'git blame' applied to this function. Nathann P.S.: for me it is clearly a joke, and I would be alarmed if anybody thought that it actually makes sense. -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
I am feeling inclined to open a trac ticket with the purpose of going through everyhting I have written in the Sage library and making sure that there's an AUTHOR block with my name on it wherever appropriate! And if all current developers would do the same John On 23 September 2015 at 03:08, Nathann Cohen wrote: >> This argument is unconvincing to me; it's too black and white. You >> could also make the same argument about the majority of content in >> every research paper ever written. Just because "people" do things >> doesn't automatically imply that what they do is not even remotely >> correct. And our extensive testing framework in Sage -- which at >> least helps -- doesn't at all imply that the code in Sage is correct. > > You may not like the argument, but appreciate at least the current > status: it is far from being reliable in any way. > > That is is *because* it is maintained manually is my opinion of it, > but does not change the current status. > > Though you cannot ignore it totally either: we don't all manage those > authors blocks the same way, plus we have different opinions about > it... I don't see it work anytime soon unless it becomes mandatory > like the 'author' field in a trac ticket. > > And, again, the same way that we removed changelogs from SPKG.txt > files, let's not have a changelog in every function. > > 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. -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
> This argument is unconvincing to me; it's too black and white. You > could also make the same argument about the majority of content in > every research paper ever written. Just because "people" do things > doesn't automatically imply that what they do is not even remotely > correct. And our extensive testing framework in Sage -- which at > least helps -- doesn't at all imply that the code in Sage is correct. You may not like the argument, but appreciate at least the current status: it is far from being reliable in any way. That is is *because* it is maintained manually is my opinion of it, but does not change the current status. Though you cannot ignore it totally either: we don't all manage those authors blocks the same way, plus we have different opinions about it... I don't see it work anytime soon unless it becomes mandatory like the 'author' field in a trac ticket. And, again, the same way that we removed changelogs from SPKG.txt files, let's not have a changelog in every function. 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Wed, 23 Sep 2015, Simon King wrote: In other words, you suggest that we will in future have "maintainers" for functions or modules in the SageMath library, although we just got rid of the good old "SPKG maintainers"? Good point. Forget this idea. -- Jori Mäntysalo
[sage-devel] Re: SPKG Maintainers??
Hi Jori, On 2015-09-23, Jori =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=E4ntysalo?= wrote: > On Tue, 22 Sep 2015, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote: > >> I had some random people contact me with questions about the modules >> I've written and I suspect it was due to the AUTHORS block, so it is >> useful to users. > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2015, Nathann Cohen wrote: > >> code is not static like a scientific paper. Contrary to it, code is >> modified over time and after a while an authors block does not make >> any sense. > > I think that both of the above are correct. So I wild(?) idea... > > Could we have some kind of "contact"-chain? Are developers ready to answer > questions about their code and documentation? Then the point would shift > from "I made this." to "I can debug or clarify this, if needed."? In other words, you suggest that we will in future have "maintainers" for functions or modules in the SageMath library, although we just got rid of the good old "SPKG maintainers"? 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.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: SPKG Maintainers??
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Nathann Cohen wrote: > Simon, > > By reading your message I am under the impression that you actually > believe that the information contained in 'authors' block is somehow > consistent or even remotely correct. > > It is not. > > *because* it is mainained manually. This argument is unconvincing to me; it's too black and white. You could also make the same argument about the majority of content in every research paper ever written. Just because "people" do things doesn't automatically imply that what they do is not even remotely correct. And our extensive testing framework in Sage -- which at least helps -- doesn't at all imply that the code in Sage is correct. William > Which means that we forget to > update it, that those who contribute a lot are those who will not > leave their name. Because it is done manually, it is totally > unreliable. > > The trac server, at least, keeps its promises: each ticket has an author > field. > Git blame, at least, keeps its promises: it tells you who last modified a > line. > > You will not solve the problem by having us maintain manually a > changelog in every single function. > > I prefer to do it wikipedia-style: "what matters here is the code, not > who wrote it" (except for debugging purposes -> git blame). And if I > need to explain to someone that I am a Sage contributor, they will > find what they need on my home page. > > Nathann > http://www.steinertriples.fr/ncohen/ > > -- > 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 (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: SPKG Maintainers??
Simon, By reading your message I am under the impression that you actually believe that the information contained in 'authors' block is somehow consistent or even remotely correct. It is not. *because* it is mainained manually. Which means that we forget to update it, that those who contribute a lot are those who will not leave their name. Because it is done manually, it is totally unreliable. The trac server, at least, keeps its promises: each ticket has an author field. Git blame, at least, keeps its promises: it tells you who last modified a line. You will not solve the problem by having us maintain manually a changelog in every single function. I prefer to do it wikipedia-style: "what matters here is the code, not who wrote it" (except for debugging purposes -> git blame). And if I need to explain to someone that I am a Sage contributor, they will find what they need on my home page. Nathann http://www.steinertriples.fr/ncohen/ -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
Hi Nathann, On 2015-09-22, Nathann Cohen wrote: >> I usually add my name as author when I feel that I'm contributing something >> new, not just fixing bugs. > > It can make sense to add your name when you add something new, but > code is not static like a scientific paper. Contrary to it, code is > modified over time and after a while an authors block does not make > any sense. I totally disagree with that. If the history of changes to the code gets messy, then "git blame" will be hardly able to answer the question who wrote the original code. In order to keep a record of the authorship of changes, it is essential to have an AUTHORS block, IMHO. > The best we can have when it comes to acknowledgement is our trac > server: it stores what each of us did, and this history does not > change. Then we have 'git blame' when we want to know who wrote one > specific line. You assume that you know a specific line to look at. How do you find a line that is significant for the authorship of a whole function or even module? > With the trac history and the git history, I believe that we have > trustworthy information in both directions. I disagree with your notion of "to have". Assume that you go to a shop and the shop keeper asks you to pay 100 Euros for something. Will the shop keeper accept it as payment if you tell him that he "has" the money, namely there are 100 Euros for him in one drawer in one piece of furniture in one room of your apartment (he "only" has to find your apartment and search through it...)? No, he will not. And I don't accept if someone tells me that I "have" the information in the trac history and the git history, since I first need to analyse code, use git, open a trac ticket and so on, before I REALLY have the information. 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: SPKG Maintainers??
Hi William, On 2015-09-22, William Stein wrote: > People probably don't remember the early days of Sage, but there was > often a belief that the project would be *impossible* due to the math > culture in which authorship had to be clearly maintained. Many people > sincerely thought that the GAP or PARI developers would be very angry > that their system was used in Sage, and that people wouldn't > contribute since their contributions wouldn't be acknowledged. I do remember that some Singular developers did get seriously angry if people cited Sage without mentioning that the real work was in fact done by Singular called from Sage. 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: SPKG Maintainers??
Hi Dima, On 2015-09-22, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > One way or another, there are Copyright notices with names in many files, > and Author entries, sometimes they > have to do something with each other, sometimes not, sometimes there are > huge additions done > by people without adding their names to either of these fields... > It's a mess. IMHO, for a user, it is still easier to find his/her way through that information mess than to use version control to find the same information in an even bigger mess. 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: SPKG Maintainers??
Hi Andrey, hi all, On 2015-09-22, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote: > I had some random people contact me with questions about the modules I've > written and I suspect it was due to the AUTHORS block, so it is useful to > users. I did the same as that user. And still do now. Using "git blame" to find out the commit that changed an interesting part of code, then looking up that commit and then finally finding the author's name is a very awkward procedure. Looking up the name in the source file is a lot simpler. > Regarding git, it took me a while to get reasonably comfortable with it +1. > it is unreasonable to expect someone to learn using it > just for the sake of figuring out who wrote what. +2. > And for git blame specifically - it is often ugly when there were multiple > layers of semi-automated changes in the file and each line has its own > commit (rather than some logical blocks). +1. I started to wonder if the above procedure---browsing the code in "git blame" (I configured it so that the code is opened in "less"), finding out by reading and understanding code (!) which lines are interesting, coping the commit number from the start of an interesting line, leaving "less", browsing "git log" (again opening "less", searching for the commit number, and finally reading the author name---really is the simplest way to solve the problem in git. If it is---and Andrey seems to confirm---then git isn't suitable for that task, and we should keep using AUTHORS blocks. We can expect users to be able to read (the documentation). But we can not expect users (in contrast to developers) to be familiar with git. 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: SPKG Maintainers??
> > > As a code contributor I feel that core contributors should deserve more > thanks, not me... > > I feel similarly. > But what if I start to write my name to comments? Then they can later be > semi-automatically extracted, if wanted? Like > > def foo(): > """ > Do foo. > """ > # Author: Jori Mäntysalo > > for a new function or > > # Author: Jori Mäntysalo // Added support for bar objects. > That sounds fine, if that is what you are comfortable with. *Removing* AUTHOR blocks is maybe not so good, though, unless there are specific reasons. -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, William Stein wrote: If anything, I think we should systematically do vastly *more* to clearly acknowledge and appreciate the code contributors to Sage. They are by far the most important people to the existence of Sage. As a code contributor I feel that core contributors should deserve more thanks, not me... But what if I start to write my name to comments? Then they can later be semi-automatically extracted, if wanted? Like def foo(): """ Do foo. """ # Author: Jori Mäntysalo for a new function or # Author: Jori Mäntysalo // Added support for bar objects. for an important enhancement. -- Jori Mäntysalo
Re: [sage-devel] Re: SPKG Maintainers??
On Monday, 21 September 2015 21:42:31 UTC-7, William wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Kwankyu Lee > wrote: > > I have written a couple of AUTHORS-blocks, but I think I did it not to > have > > a credit but to be responsible for the code. > > > > AUTHORS blocks are rather for developers, not for end users. > These blocks > > are rather hindrance for end users as they usually appear at the head > of a > > When I "invented" this idea of AUTHORS blocks, they were definitelynot > only for developers but also for end users.They were partly meant > as an antidote to what happened with Magma when "they" deleted all the > names of many of the contributors to Magma from the beginnings of the > relevant sections of the reference manual, which pissed a lot of > contributors off. > > When you read a mathematics paper you don't say "this statement of the > authors of this paper at the top is not for readers and is a > hindrance". > > If anything, I think we should systematically do vastly *more* to > clearly acknowledge and appreciate the code contributors to Sage. > They are by far the most important people to the existence of Sage. g > I know at least one prolific Sage contributor who does not add himself to AUTHORS block, and actually is removing these blocks. IMHO we need an official policy on this. > -- William > > > documentation but these information, like TODO and TESTS, is not usually > > what the user expects to see in the doc. These developer-oriented > blocks > > are better to be hidden or placed in less prominent place for the end > users. > > > > -- > > 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 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- > William (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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > I have written a couple of AUTHORS-blocks, but I think I did it not to have > a credit but to be responsible for the code. > > AUTHORS blocks are rather for developers, not for end users. These blocks > are rather hindrance for end users as they usually appear at the head of a When I "invented" this idea of AUTHORS blocks, they were definitelynot only for developers but also for end users.They were partly meant as an antidote to what happened with Magma when "they" deleted all the names of many of the contributors to Magma from the beginnings of the relevant sections of the reference manual, which pissed a lot of contributors off. When you read a mathematics paper you don't say "this statement of the authors of this paper at the top is not for readers and is a hindrance". If anything, I think we should systematically do vastly *more* to clearly acknowledge and appreciate the code contributors to Sage. They are by far the most important people to the existence of Sage. -- William > documentation but these information, like TODO and TESTS, is not usually > what the user expects to see in the doc. These developer-oriented blocks > are better to be hidden or placed in less prominent place for the end users. > > -- > 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 (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: SPKG Maintainers??
I have written a couple of AUTHORS-blocks, but I think I did it not to have a credit but to be responsible for the code. AUTHORS blocks are rather for developers, not for end users. These blocks are rather hindrance for end users as they usually appear at the head of a documentation but these information, like TODO and TESTS, is not usually what the user expects to see in the doc. These developer-oriented blocks are better to be hidden or placed in less prominent place for the end users. -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: > >> I agree with that part. It would be wrong to remove the AUTHORS blocks >> without putting corresponding acklowledgements in an equally prominent >> place. > > > What if I do a small change? Not enought to mention, but something > potentially stupid. I don't want others to be blamed for something I have > done. > If it is serious enough that "blame" is involved, then people are going to use "git blame" to see exactly who did it. If the person listed in AUTHORS were contacted, they could also defend themselves by using "git blame." William > -- > Jori Mäntysalo -- William (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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: I agree with that part. It would be wrong to remove the AUTHORS blocks without putting corresponding acklowledgements in an equally prominent place. What if I do a small change? Not enought to mention, but something potentially stupid. I don't want others to be blamed for something I have done. -- Jori Mäntysalo
[sage-devel] Re: SPKG Maintainers??
Simon King wrote:
> it is also supposed to say *who* did *what* ("what" meaning the
> purpose/intention of the change)
Commit messages too, and I'd argue they are the right place to do
that...
(Incidentally, I'm not sure git blame would be the right tool if we did
want to auto-generate author information for the reference manual.
Something like git shortlog looks like a better starting point to me. It
could perhaps combined with some kind of weighting of commits and/or the
ability to use meta-information extracted from the commit message.)
--
Marc
--
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: SPKG Maintainers??
William Stein wrote: > If somebody explicitly puts their name in the AUTHORS block when they > are writing the code in the first place, then we should respect that > and continue to acknowledge them. I agree with that part. It would be wrong to remove the AUTHORS blocks without putting corresponding acklowledgements in an equally prominent place. -- Marc -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 5:42:23 PM UTC+2, Simon King wrote: > > Sure, git blame is able ignore whitespace. But still it would not be > able to determine if you did a substantial change in code or if you just > mechanically changed, say, function names from the API of an old third > party package to the API of the new package version. > Thats trivial to see in the git blame output, isolated line changes a long time after the surrounding code. Of course thats not the same as a human-written "AUTHORS" block, but mostly because the human-written changelog is typically wrong and misses stuff. Theoretically we miss semantics, but in practice many authors don't updated AUTHORS blocks so those don't have the semantics either. Its just a feel-good tag. Thats not wrong, but not really helpful as part of the online help either. -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On 2015-09-18, Volker Braun wrote:
> Most people don't write AUTHORS blocks, and don't update them if they
> change anything. And why? Because its an annoying manual duplication of
> what git does automatically, of course.
That's simply not true.
Sure, git blame is able ignore whitespace. But still it would not be
able to determine if you did a substantial change in code or if you just
mechanically changed, say, function names from the API of an old third
party package to the API of the new package version.
Or shortly, git isn't able to recognise semantics.
The AUTHORS block does not just list the names of people who did
something (that's what git blame can tell), but it also is supposed to
imply that the contribution was "substantial", and actually it is also
supposed to say *who* did *what* ("what" meaning the purpose/intention
of the change). That's semantic information that a script will surely
miss.
--
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: SPKG Maintainers??
On 2015-09-18, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > --=_Part_2383_90296384.1442579899264 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="=_Part_2384_182350915.1442579899264" > > --=_Part_2384_182350915.1442579899264 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > > > On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 9:06:55 PM UTC+9, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: >> >> Tangentially related: wouldn't it be better to also remove the "AUTHORS" >> sections from docstrings? > > > Big +1! Big -1. Having an "AUTHORS" section means to give credit to people. That's a good thing, because we can obviously not expect the average user to do "git blame" to find the author, but reading the documentation is something that some users do. But "spkg maintainer" means something different. It denotes a person that is reponsible for keeping the spkg functional IN FUTURE; hence, it implies an obligation. But "AUTHOR" is someone who made or kept the spkg functional IN THE PAST; it deserves credit, but does not imply an obligation for future work. That's why I agree to remove spkg maintainers, but not authors. 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > > > On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 9:06:55 PM UTC+9, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: >> >> Tangentially related: wouldn't it be better to also remove the "AUTHORS" >> sections from docstrings? > > > Big +1! Big -1! > > > Kwankyu > > -- > 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 (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: SPKG Maintainers??
On 18 September 2015 at 13:38, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > > > On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 9:06:55 PM UTC+9, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: >> >> Tangentially related: wouldn't it be better to also remove the "AUTHORS" >> sections from docstrings? > > > Big +1! Really? If the information was accurate and complete it would surely be good to have -- original implementer and any one else who did anything non-trivial (e.g. bug fix or improved algorithm). Just because Sage is open source does not mean that contributors should not get credit for their work. Or perhaps I have misunderstood this additional suggestion (not the main topic of the thread anyway)? John > > > Kwankyu > > -- > 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: SPKG Maintainers??
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: Tangentially related: wouldn't it be better to also remove the "AUTHORS" sections from docstrings? I haven't written AUTHORS-blocks, as I guess most developers have not. But in any case, documentation should be foldable. Maybe one click could show ALGORITHM and TODO, and second click TESTS and AUTHORS. -- Jori Mäntysalo
[sage-devel] Re: SPKG Maintainers??
On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 9:06:55 PM UTC+9, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: > > Tangentially related: wouldn't it be better to also remove the "AUTHORS" > sections from docstrings? Big +1! Kwankyu -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
Hi, Tangentially related: wouldn't it be better to also remove the "AUTHORS" sections from docstrings? -- Marc -- 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: SPKG Maintainers??
Agree, if you want to know who wrote what then git blame is much more useful than "SPKG Maintainers". On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 8:24:14 AM UTC, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > Hello, > > all SPKG.txt files list "SPKG Maintainers". I never quite understood the > reason for this. Mostly, this seems to have been added once when > creating the SPKG and indeed many "maintainers" have long left Sage. > Since these sections doesn't seem to have a purpose, can we just remove > those? > -- 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.
