Hi Dan,
Thank you for your comments. We will discuss this more on Tuesday.
> It seems to me that a fork would be a bad idea if it can possibly
> be avoided.
I agree, especially if the aim is to merge the branches eventually with
sage-main rather than having a separate project. Travis brought up
>From Dan Bump:
Hi Anne,
I'm not cc:ing the google group since I don't think I'm authorized to
post from this email address. But I'm cc:ing Andrew and Travis.
I am in Davis now. Greg Musicker was arriving on the shuttle as
I got back from dinner.
Here is a link to my slides:
http://sporadic.s
Hi!
Here is an initial list of discussion points regarding the Sage-combinat queue:
- Should we use a fork for sage-combinat? Or branches for the various patches
or projects?
* If we do use a fork, how to sync the combinat fork with the main sage
fork? In particular, once branches are mer
Dear Sage-combinat developers,
As most of you are probably aware of, the Sage development will soon
change from hg to git. At the same time, the sage-combinat queue will
need to be transformed into git branches. Most likely, this will mean
a more shallow structure (rather than a linear queue) with
