Re: [sage-devel] Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

[Dima Pasechnik]

Hi Volker,

On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 10:22 AM Volker Braun  wrote:

> Yes in a perfect world, but then you don't get a gold star for satisfying
> some purity test. We should just do the minimal amount of work to get us
> where we want to be. Lets focus on the direction to go and not too much on
> the process.
>


the keywords are "where we want to be" and "direction".
The revert should happen as there is no agreement on this.

It would help if we first sort out and agree on these, then we can resume
the normal operations.

IMHO it would help if you stopped touching these disputed PRs until this
these are done, or at least for a set period of time,
say a month or two.

Dima



>
> On Friday, April 19, 2024 at 7:18:03 PM UTC+2 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2024-04-19 at 09:46 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>> >
>> > Michael, note that in my message I asked for a vote on that dependency
>> > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676.
>> >
>>
>> Even if 36676 gets approval, 36964 must be reverted. It was not
>> meaningfully voted upon.
>>
>> --
> 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/b9d41da8-57ec-4542-a5d8-7f2690849a49n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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/CAAWYfq3iAWpJQpMFzcF09-FnNgzMXnsExzpUti-YAZ%2BrhCNqDQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

[Michael Orlitzky]

On Sat, 2024-04-20 at 02:22 -0700, Volker Braun wrote:
> Yes in a perfect world, but then you don't get a gold star for satisfying 
> some purity test. We should just do the minimal amount of work to get us 
> where we want to be. Lets focus on the direction to go and not too much on 
> the process.

We don't know where we want to be. To figure that out, we should hold
some kind of vote or something.

-- 
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/0af0f7b84ecf841a5a034725bdf903721fecf4cf.camel%40orlitzky.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

[Volker Braun]

Yes in a perfect world, but then you don't get a gold star for satisfying 
some purity test. We should just do the minimal amount of work to get us 
where we want to be. Lets focus on the direction to go and not too much on 
the process.

On Friday, April 19, 2024 at 7:18:03 PM UTC+2 Michael Orlitzky wrote:

> On Fri, 2024-04-19 at 09:46 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> > 
> > Michael, note that in my message I asked for a vote on that dependency 
> > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676.
> > 
>
> Even if 36676 gets approval, 36964 must be reverted. It was not
> meaningfully voted upon.
>
>

-- 
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/b9d41da8-57ec-4542-a5d8-7f2690849a49n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

[Michael Orlitzky]

On Fri, 2024-04-19 at 09:46 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> 
> Michael, note that in my message I asked for a vote on that dependency 
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676.
> 

Even if 36676 gets approval, 36964 must be reverted. It was not
meaningfully voted upon.

-- 
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/f1e270d25dbbb709bc5de43f6e4586502551b587.camel%40orlitzky.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

[Matthias Koeppe]

On Friday, April 19, 2024 at 3:47:38 AM UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote:

On 2024-04-18 14:18:37, Matthias Koeppe wrote: 
> As an alternative to the proposal to back out the 
> PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36964 whose *disputed dependency 
> PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 which had not reached the 
> required 2:1 supermajority *of the dispute-resolution process *(it 
> currently only has a simple majority of 7 votes in favor, 5 votes 
against)* 
> --- I am asking for your votes on that dependency PR 
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 to heal the process. This 
will 
> avoid further delays and disruptions. 

This doesn't circumvent the issue. Voting on PRs with disputed 
dependencies is nonsensical and counterproductive. We were told they 
wouldn't be merged. I have no idea what 36964 is about and if I'm for 
or against it because it's a waste of time until its dependencies are 
accepted/rejected. Only then (after another two weeks or whatever) can 
the vote on 36964 be considered meaningful.


Michael, note that in my message I asked for a vote on that dependency 
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676.

-- 
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/cf5260aa-5c1b-4306-a165-d6eb03a15e67n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 2024-04-18 14:18:37, Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> Dear all:
> 
> As an alternative to the proposal to back out the 
> PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36964 whose *disputed dependency 
> PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 which had not reached the 
> required 2:1 supermajority *of the dispute-resolution process *(it 
> currently only has a simple majority of 7 votes in favor, 5 votes against)* 
> --- I am asking for your votes on that dependency PR 
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 to heal the process. This will 
> avoid further delays and disruptions.

This doesn't circumvent the issue. Voting on PRs with disputed
dependencies is nonsensical and counterproductive. We were told they
wouldn't be merged. I have no idea what 36964 is about and if I'm for
or against it because it's a waste of time until its dependencies are
accepted/rejected. Only then (after another two weeks or whatever) can
the vote on 36964 be considered meaningful.

-- 
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/ZiJLyed2j5zM1xfp%40stitch.

Re: [sage-devel] Urgent and important: Please vote on disputed PR #36964 (next step of the modularization project)

[Dima Pasechnik]

Another attempt at derailing the ongoing vote, not unexpected.

Besides, Matthias must be really the greatest democrat of all - 1st he blocks a 
part of electorate from voting at the designated venue, and then invite 
everyone to vote there.

I urge everyone to ignore this alternative vote - to protest against this 
offensive behaviour.

Dima

On 18 April 2024 22:18:37 BST, Matthias Koeppe  wrote:
>Dear all:
>
>As an alternative to the proposal to back out the 
>PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36964 whose *disputed dependency 
>PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 which had not reached the 
>required 2:1 supermajority *of the dispute-resolution process *(it 
>currently only has a simple majority of 7 votes in favor, 5 votes against)* 
>--- I am asking for your votes on that dependency PR 
>https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 to heal the process. This will 
>avoid further delays and disruptions.
>
>*What is the modularization project?* The Sage developer community has long 
>been aware of the severe problems that the monolithic design of Sage has 
>brought. See in particular the lively 2016 sage-devel thread "How we 
>develop Sage" (https://groups.google.com/g/ sage-devel/c/29ndCD8z94k) 
>initiated by William. In its current incarnation, "modularization project" 
>refers to my proposal from May 2020,
>- to use modern Python packaging ("PEP 517/518/660") and Python 3's 
>"implicit namespace packages" to 
>- break the Sage library into separately buildable and installable 
>"distribution packages"
>- while keeping the structure of the source tree mostly unchanged, 
>monolithic, for the convenience of the Sage developer community.
>For the project, hundreds of tickets/PRs have been prepared and merged over 
>the past 4 years, see the Meta-ticket 
>https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/29705 for a list.
>
>*Has the Sage community been informed and consulted regarding the 
>modularization project? *Yes, in addition to the normal review that all 
>tickets/PRs underwent:
>- I have given detailed presentations about the project in SageDays 110 
>(2020), 112.358 (2022), 120 (2023), 
>see https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/29705 for links.
>- A chapter of the Sage Developer Guide, 
>https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/packaging_sage_library.html#packaging-the-sage-library,
> 
>provides a detailed description of the design
>- I have posted numerous times to sage-devel, most recently the series 
>"SageMath modularization project: The five by five" (2023-06). See 
>https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/29705 for links to all of these.
>- Specifically, in the post "Modularization project: V. The blocs" 
>(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/kiB32zP3xD4/m/GJ0qF7TTAAAJ, 
>2023-06), I outlined the design of the pip-installable packages such as 
>sagemath-combinat, sagemath-graphs, sagemath-flint, sagemath-plot etc. 
>- And in my 2023-11 post 
>https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/kiB32zP3xD4/m/GJ0qF7TTAAAJ in the 
>same thread, I asked: 
>> Ready for review: A restructuring of our "all.py" files along these 
>dependencies in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676. This is an 
>opportunity to review the contents of the proposed distributions 
>implemented in Mega-PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35095 (~50 
>kLOC changes, not open for review). As 
>https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 rewrites all "all.py" files, it 
>is also an opportunity for a deliberate coding style decision for these 
>files. I welcome all constructive discussions in the PR.
>
>*What does the PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676 do? *Per its 
>title, "Restructure sage.*.all for modularization, replace relative by 
>absolute imports". The PR is "mostly harmless": There are no user-visible 
>changes; it's just a bunch of imports that are moved around. It includes no 
>policy change of any kind; it only executes a design that was previously 
>reviewed and carefully documented in separate PRs. Nothing permanent or 
>irreversible is done here. The new files provide the top-level namespaces 
>needed for doctesting modularized installations of Sage.
>
>*Has it been reviewed?* Yes, David Coudert and John Palmieri did a detailed 
>review. This was completed on November 15, 2023 --- over 5 months ago.
>
>*How did this PR become "disputed"?* Back in November, one commenter 
>floated an (untested) alternative design 
>(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#pullrequestreview-1726079717); 
>I explained 
>in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-1806873154 why 
>it's not suitable. Commenter demanded that the previously reviewed and 
>documented design is reopened for discussion, 
>https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36676#issuecomment-1863667919. 
>
>*What are the concerns that have been made known during the voting process 
>for this PR (March/April 2024)?* I will not attempt to paraphrase, but here 
>are links to some posts so that you can find the discussion