Re: Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On Monday 01 February 2010, Nick Alexander wrote: > > I think I've done a LOT for Sage - I would request you do not > > purposely break the PA-RISC support in MPIR, when it clearly passes > > all your self tests on HP-UX. I do not believe thiat is an > > unreasonable request. > > I take issue with the claim that you have done "a LOT" for Sage. Let > me be clear: I appreciate the effort you put into porting Sage to > other architectures. But I question how many people are interested in > actually using Sage on those architectures. Hi Nick, I get your frustration and I appreciate how much it must be for you to react so strongly. We don't all have to agree what a big contribution is and what not. Some people really appreciate the porting efforts some people don't care. I also get that the additional burden scares people of, yet another platform one does not care about to worry about. Support for Solaris does not mean that every Sage developer has to work with it and to support it. I really see no need for a competition who is more valuable etc. and I really see no need to *take issue* with David's claim that he did a lot for Sage. I personally think he did. One the other hand, we should all (including David) maybe take a step back and appreciate that most people on this list are volunteers and that any demanding tone will not get us anywhere. We all do it from time to time, when we are frustrated, but it does not help anyone. Cheers, Martin -- name: Martin Albrecht _pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99 _otr: 47F43D1A 5D68C36F 468BAEBA 640E8856 D7951CCF _www: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~malb _jab: martinralbre...@jabber.ccc.de -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On 31-Jan-10, at 11:35 PM, Peter Jeremy wrote: On 2010-Jan-31 22:02:19 -0800, Nick Alexander wrote: Not at all. But take away mathematics, and we don't have a *product*. Take away release management, fixing bugs, documentation, or maintaining the web site and we have an inferior project, but we still have a project. Take away support for Solaris or HP-UX, and we don't serve what appears, to me, to be a small market. (Certainly small compared to the potential pool of Microsoft Windows users.) IMHO, that's a particularly unhelpful attitude. Who said that was my attitude? I explicitly recognized David's efforts on our behalf. But notice: in your reply, the one thing you didn't subject to your thought experiment was Solaris support! I think I am done with this thread. I have put in my two cents; I think everyone reading this thread knows that at least one sage developer is not thrilled with the additional burden that Solaris/HPUX/ platform X support puts on the project. I'm certainly not intending to agitate against your efforts -- but I would like that the cost that comes with them be recognized, and, when reasonable, debated. Nick -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On 2010-Jan-31 22:02:19 -0800, Nick Alexander wrote: >Not at all. But take away mathematics, and we don't have a >*product*. Take away release management, fixing bugs, documentation, >or maintaining the web site and we have an inferior project, but we >still have a project. Take away support for Solaris or HP-UX, and we >don't serve what appears, to me, to be a small market. (Certainly >small compared to the potential pool of Microsoft Windows users.) IMHO, that's a particularly unhelpful attitude. Take away the web site and none of your potential users will know about your product or be able to find/download it. Take away documentation and no-one will know how to use it. Take away bug fixes and no-one can trust the results returned by your product. Take away release management and no-one can be sure whether the version they are running has specific bugs fixed or not and what environment the product should run in. Maybe you'd still have a project, but it wouldn't be one that was of much use to anyone: If by some chance you managed to find an executable and worked out how to drive it, it might be able to produce an output very quickly but by the time you'd double-checked the calculation, you might as well have done it by hand to start with. -- Peter Jeremy pgpxT0fyPN0OP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On 1 February 2010 05:51, Tim Lahey wrote: > Solaris isn't exactly an "unusual" architecture. That's what he's done the > most at > supporting. He certainly has done "a LOT" at supporting it. I think what he's > asking > that Bill not purposely break FLINT since it does currently work. If was MPIR I was requesting Bill did not purposely break, as that works. I am not sure of the situation with Flint. > I hate to think that the only people that are valid contributors to Sage are > mathematicians. So, doing the release management, fixing bugs, documentation, > or > maintaining the web site aren't important? > > Cheers, > > Tim. Thank you Tim. Dave -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On 1 February 2010 06:02, Nick Alexander wrote: >> I hate to think that the only people that are valid contributors to Sage >> are >> mathematicians. So, doing the release management, fixing bugs, >> documentation, or >> maintaining the web site aren't important? > > Not at all. But take away mathematics, and we don't have a *product*. Take > away release management, fixing bugs, documentation, or maintaining the web > site and we have an inferior project, but we still have a project. Without a web site, it would not be a product available to anyone easily. > Take > away support for Solaris or HP-UX, and we don't serve what appears, to me, > to be a small market. (Certainly small compared to the potential pool of > Microsoft Windows users.) Sun have donated a T5240, which William accepted. They have also given him significant hardware discounts on other items. The main file server, 'disk' is a Sun running Open Solaris. I believe sage.math is a Sun running Linux, though I am not sure of that fact. Only the other week, Willaim sent me an email telling me how important it was to get the Solaris port completed. I'm not denying the Windows port would get more users. than Solaris. People are working on the Cygwin port. I have no intension of running Sage on HP-UX. But I do believe that by making code more portable, one does uncover bugs which do not show up on one platform, but wait to hit you at a later date. I once spent ages trying to trac down a bug on AIX, which was not reproducible, but did occasionally occur. When I eventually found the bug, I realised it would have affected any platform (including Linux), but had just not showed up before. An ex-colleage who tested his code on a quad processor SPARC for the first time, found a bug which could have affected him on Linux, but he had not noticed it. Dave -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
By and large, we are a community of mathematicians. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are not contributing to the mathematical aspects of Sage. Until that changes, your goals and my goals are only occasionally aligned. I hate to think that the only people that are valid contributors to Sage are mathematicians. So, doing the release management, fixing bugs, documentation, or maintaining the web site aren't important? Not at all. But take away mathematics, and we don't have a *product*. Take away release management, fixing bugs, documentation, or maintaining the web site and we have an inferior project, but we still have a project. Take away support for Solaris or HP-UX, and we don't serve what appears, to me, to be a small market. (Certainly small compared to the potential pool of Microsoft Windows users.) Nick -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On 02-01-2010, at 12:45 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: > > I take issue with the claim that you have done "a LOT" for Sage. Let me be > clear: I appreciate the effort you put into porting Sage to other > architectures. But I question how many people are interested in actually > using Sage on those architectures. You can read the obvious frustration Bill > Hart feels around supporting flint and other software on these unusual > architectures. I want to make it clear that he is not the only one > frustrated with the recent emphasis on porting issues that are unlikely to > affect me. > Solaris isn't exactly an "unusual" architecture. That's what he's done the most at supporting. He certainly has done "a LOT" at supporting it. I think what he's asking that Bill not purposely break FLINT since it does currently work. > By and large, we are a community of mathematicians. Correct me if I'm wrong, > but you are not contributing to the mathematical aspects of Sage. Until that > changes, your goals and my goals are only occasionally aligned. I hate to think that the only people that are valid contributors to Sage are mathematicians. So, doing the release management, fixing bugs, documentation, or maintaining the web site aren't important? Cheers, Tim. --- Tim Lahey PhD Candidate, Systems Design Engineering University of Waterloo http://www.linkedin.com/in/timlahey -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
I think I've done a LOT for Sage - I would request you do not purposely break the PA-RISC support in MPIR, when it clearly passes all your self tests on HP-UX. I do not believe thiat is an unreasonable request. I take issue with the claim that you have done "a LOT" for Sage. Let me be clear: I appreciate the effort you put into porting Sage to other architectures. But I question how many people are interested in actually using Sage on those architectures. You can read the obvious frustration Bill Hart feels around supporting flint and other software on these unusual architectures. I want to make it clear that he is not the only one frustrated with the recent emphasis on porting issues that are unlikely to affect me. By and large, we are a community of mathematicians. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are not contributing to the mathematical aspects of Sage. Until that changes, your goals and my goals are only occasionally aligned. Nick Alexander -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On 31 January 2010 14:27, Bill Hart wrote: > I don't see any point listing HP-UX. That platform died in 2004. I saw > its grave. > > Here is one of the many obituaries: > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/responses/notice.cgi?NoticeID=1460 The latest release of HP-UX was September 2009 - 4 months ago. http://h20338.www2.hp.com/enterprise/w1/en/os/hpux11i-v3-update5-overview.html Typing HP-UX into Google I get 5,800,000 hits. > some time between now and > March this year, we will be removing the assembly support for the PA- > RISC processors. Recently we found an actual PA-RISC machine (though > not running HP-UX) and the assembly code was totally broken. No one > has stepped forward to work on fixing it. No one we now has the > expertise. I would request you do not, given MPIR works and passes all tests on HP-UX with at least the PA-RISC processor - I do not know about Itanium. Dave -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On 31 January 2010 14:27, Bill Hart wrote: > I don't see any point listing HP-UX. That platform died in 2004. I saw > its grave. > > Here is one of the many obituaries: > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/responses/notice.cgi?NoticeID=1460 > > I see you suggested Sage switch to GMP for an HP-UX port. Yes, but now I find MPIR does build and pass all tests on HP-UX, I would retract that - like all web pages, that one is a bit out of date. > Well, not > only will MPIR not be supporting HP-UX, but some time between now and > March this year, we will be removing the assembly support for the PA- > RISC processors. Recently we found an actual PA-RISC machine (though > not running HP-UX) and the assembly code was totally broken. No one > has stepped forward to work on fixing it. No one we now has the > expertise. MPIR does pass all tests on the PA-RISC. Give it is working, is it a good idea to purposely break it? The fact it failed on your PA-RISC machine which was not running the normal operating system for such a platform, which is HP-UX, > We'll also be removing the assembly support for a plethora of other > platforms that have long died, even their manufacturers disowning > them. The rule will be: if people aren't using it, and we don't have > access to one and it is more than a certain number of years old, > support will be discontinued. Supporting dead architectures is a > massive waste of developer effort. I'm not asking you to support them. Just leave them running if they work. PA-RISC on HP-UX does work. > We urgently need ports to Solaris 64 bit which I am working on, though concentrating on Open Solaris. One reason for doing that is that I have much faster hardware on OpenSolaris. I expect once the 64-bit issues are resolved on Open Solaris, and assuming we can get the 32-bit working again (broken in 4.3.1), I think there is every chance a 64-bit port will occur on SPARC. But perhaps not just now. I think I've done a LOT for Sage - I would request you do not purposely break the PA-RISC support in MPIR, when it clearly passes all your self tests on HP-UX. I do not believe thiat is an unreasonable request. If someone tells you they use something, and it works for them, why go out of the way to break it for them? Dave. -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Supported Platforms web page is *very* out of date
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 6:27 AM, Bill Hart wrote: > I don't see any point listing HP-UX. That platform died in 2004. I saw > its grave. > > Here is one of the many obituaries: > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/responses/notice.cgi?NoticeID=1460 > > I see you suggested Sage switch to GMP for an HP-UX port. Well, not > only will MPIR not be supporting HP-UX, but some time between now and > March this year, we will be removing the assembly support for the PA- > RISC processors. Recently we found an actual PA-RISC machine (though > not running HP-UX) and the assembly code was totally broken. No one > has stepped forward to work on fixing it. No one we now has the > expertise. > > We'll also be removing the assembly support for a plethora of other > platforms that have long died, even their manufacturers disowning > them. The rule will be: if people aren't using it, and we don't have > access to one and it is more than a certain number of years old, > support will be discontinued. Supporting dead architectures is a > massive waste of developer effort. > > We urgently need ports to Solaris 64 bit and to Windows Vista and and > Windows 7, 32 and 64 bit. We should be focusing all our efforts on > these important ports, instead of dead platforms/architectures like > AIX, HP-UX and TRU64. > > Bill. In your mind, is Linux on Itanium2 dead or alive? William -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
