Hello,
I was told to rebase a patch (namely
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13067) by the release manager.
What is the procedure to do that ? I have not found it on the mercurial
guide (http://wiki.sagemath.org/combinat/MercurialStepByStep).
I have only a rather basic understanding
what I usually do is:
this is a very nice and detailed description -- thanks! maybe you
wanna add it to wiki?
* hg qrefresh followed by hg export qtip foo.patch
is there, in this situation, a difference between hg export qtip
foo.patch and hg qrefresh (that's what I usually do here) ?
Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de writes:
Hi Frederic,
what I usually do is:
* When I have a patch foo.patch that needs rebasing, then I take a
Sage installations with all required prerequisites (i.e.,
the dependencies of foo.patch).
* Then, I try to apply foo.patch (i.e., hg
Christian Stump
christian.st...@gmail.com writes:
is there, in this situation, a difference between hg export qtip
foo.patch and hg qrefresh (that's what I usually do here) ?
`hg qrefresh` adds uncommitted changes into the topmost patch; `hg
export qtip foo.patch` simply copies the existing
This pain is caused by mq (sorry, mq, you are evil. live with it :-)).
Just pretending that the patch is a regular patch, importing it with hg
import
would land you in a workflow very much like the git's workflow for the
problem Ralf described.
(git doesn't really have an advantage here, rather
Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com writes:
This pain is caused by mq (sorry, mq, you are evil. live with it
:-)).
Just pretending that the patch is a regular patch, importing it with
hg import
would land you in a workflow very much like the git's workflow for
the
problem Ralf described.
Not
On Monday, 16 July 2012 20:49:31 UTC+8, Keshav Kini wrote:
Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com writes:
This pain is caused by mq (sorry, mq, you are evil. live with it
:-)).
Just pretending that the patch is a regular patch, importing it with
hg import
would land you in a workflow
Hi Mark,
Where can I get the crystal demo worksheet?
(Thanks Nicolas for the cool interacts).
You can find it here
http://www.ima.umn.edu/2011-2012/SW7.9-13.12/abstracts.html
or on the wiki for Sage Days 40
http://wiki.sagemath.org/days40_tutorials
P.S. Can you/someone please review my
Dear Andrew,
Finally, I would like to move these patches up to the needs review section
of the series file. Do I just do this - and check that everything still
applies - or should I defer to some one who knows
what they are doing:) ? I am happy to do either.
You can just move your patch up
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:29:21AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
Thanks again to everyone who participated in the Sage Days 40 this past
week in Minneapolis. It was great to meet you all and work with you.
I hope everyone got something out of the workshop.
Many thanks to Gregg Musiker and IMA
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 10:25:16PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
I do not think there is support for symmetric functions in several alphabets
yet,
but I could be wrong.
To emulate symmetric functions in two alphabets, you can take tensor products:
sage: Sym = SymmetricFunctions(QQ)
Mark Shimozono wrote:
| P.P.P.S Daniel Bump, let me know when I can have a go at the extended
affine Weyl groups,
| Hecke algebras and their polynomial modules, etc.
I'm keeping my revisions to the extended affine patch in a separate patch
to be folded. I
have some debugging and further
The change in the deprecation framework (http://trac.sagemath.org/10508)
has been merged into sage-5.2.rc0. This is likely to break any patches that
are using deprecations. I can assure you that all jokes about deprecating
the deprecations have already been made.
What needs to be done is
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:49:47AM -0700, Volker Braun wrote:
The change in the deprecation framework (http://trac.sagemath.org/10508)
has been merged into sage-5.2.rc0. This is likely to break any patches
that are using deprecations.
Sight ...
Oh well, let us all count and report
Hi Anne!
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:53:52AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
Would it be ok to move to sage-5.2.rc0 and have the queue apply
there to avoid the conflicts?
That's fine for me, but this would mean that all the Sage Days 40
newcomers from last week will need to instantly
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 07:03:13PM -0400, Mark Shimozono wrote:
P.P.S Nicolas T., thanks much for the recent functorial construction
of the group algebra of a root-lattice-realization,
which was duly shown to me by Nicolas B. From this it will be easy for
me to gracefully do GKM theory for
I've rebased http://trac.sagemath.org/5457 on top of the deprecation change
and it was a very easy change.
On Monday, July 16, 2012 12:53:52 PM UTC-4, Anne Schilling wrote:
Dear Volker,
The ticket http://trac.sagemath.org/5457 uses many deprecation warnings.
I tried to make your change
Hi Travis,
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 07:20:39AM -0700, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
I have a hunch as to what is going on with my patch. There's a
dependency on Nicolas's 12925 tutorial patch which has been merged into
5.2, thus it no longer appears in the patch queue. In
Hi Anne,
On 2012-07-16, Anne Schilling a...@math.ucdavis.edu wrote:
Dear Simon,
I would like to remove the line
- Use #7980 to handle the multiple realizations
in ../combinat/sf/sf.py in our upcoming clean-up of symmetric functions.
However, this creates a conflict with your patch
Nicolas,
I'm apply the same guard to #6538. Let me know if there's a better
approach to this.
With #12925 applied, #6538 applies for me. Thus the queue should work now
(at least with respect to my patch).
Thanks,
Travis
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com writes:
On Monday, 16 July 2012 20:49:31 UTC+8, Keshav Kini wrote:
Not really. That's only if you do `hg import --exact`, and your
patch
has the correct headers.
yes, but it should have them if its creator had
[diff]
git = 1
in her/his .hgrc.
Dear Volker Braun,
I just installed sage-5.2.rc0, but your deprecation patch does not seem to be
part of
this version.
Dear All!
I guarded the following patches with respect to sage-5.2.rc0 as
they did not apply any longer:
trac_11305-rigged_configurations-ts.patch
22 matches
Mail list logo
