Robert Bradshaw writes:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>> The following would occur when you did `sage -b`:
>>
>> 1. sage-.ebuild would be copied out of the Sage library tree,
>> specifically out of the tree of the revision at the head of the
>> trac-12345 branch o
In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>> Can we get Lion on bsd.math.washington.edu ?
>
> I could, but then we will no longer have a 10.6 build/test machine, I
> think, and that would be bad.
> Also, I can't do this until next wee
Jason,
I forwarded this thread to Shawn Pearce, the primary author of gerrit, and
have included his response below.
--Christopher
-- Forwarded message --
From: Shawn Pearce
Date: Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 15:16
Subject: Re: [sage-devel] Re: git and gerrit
To: Christopher Swenson
Cc:
On 2/21/12 9:26 AM, Christopher Swenson wrote:
Jason,
I forwarded this thread to Shawn Pearce, the primary author of gerrit,
and have included his response below.
Cool! Thanks!
I'll have to think more about whether I agree with the "each commit
should stand on its own" philosophy mentioned
Well, I believe that gerrit was designed with the Google philosophy in
mind, so I would assume that this would mean that the software must run
after each commit that is mailed out. (This is sort of equivalent to the
way patches work now, as they cannot be committed unless all tests pass.)
There a
On 2/21/12 9:43 AM, Christopher Swenson wrote:
Well, I believe that gerrit was designed with the Google philosophy in
mind, so I would assume that this would mean that the software must run
after each commit that is mailed out. (This is sort of equivalent to
the way patches work now, as they can
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>> Can we get Lion on bsd.math.washington.edu ?
>>
>> I could, but then we will no longer have a 10.6 build/test machine, I
>> think,
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Christopher Swenson
wrote:
> Well, I believe that gerrit was designed with the Google philosophy in mind,
> so I would assume that this would mean that the software must run after each
> commit that is mailed out. (This is sort of equivalent to the way patches
> w
On 2/21/12 12:19 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
Perhaps we could require that every state
of the main line be consistant, and if it's worthwhile to preserve
inconsistent history we merge it as a branch rather than rebasing.
That seems very reasonable to me.
Thanks,
Jason
--
To post to this grou
On Feb 21, 2012, at 08:13 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>> In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
Can we get Lion on bsd.math.washington.edu ?
>>>
>>> I could, but then w
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> I'll have to think more about whether I agree with the "each commit should
> stand on its own" philosophy mentioned below. It certainly makes bisection
> easier. But sometimes huge patches make me think that each *branch* should
> stand on it
I agree with a lot of what was just said.
My only possible issue with the github workflow: I'm not sure how it
interacts with having multiple people who have control of the "master"
(central) repo. When a pull request comes in, can anyone who has push
access to the repo take control of that pull r
On 2/21/12 1:03 PM, Christopher Swenson wrote:
I agree with a lot of what was just said.
My only possible issue with the github workflow: I'm not sure how it
interacts with having multiple people who have control of the "master"
(central) repo. When a pull request comes in, can anyone who has pu
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Christopher Swenson
wrote:
> My only possible issue with the github workflow: I'm not sure how it
> interacts with having multiple people who have control of the "master"
> (central) repo. When a pull request comes in, can anyone who has push access
> to the repo
On 2/21/12 1:17 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
Yes. Typically one or more core committers participate in the
discussion, and it's easy to informally choose who does the final
merge. But if you want to be more formal about it, there's an
assignee field and a project can choose to use it explicitly an
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Christopher Swenson
> wrote:
>> My only possible issue with the github workflow: I'm not sure how it
>> interacts with having multiple people who have control of the "master"
>> (central) repo. When a pull
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
>
>> No, you can keep pushing to the branch you created the PR from, and
>> new commits show up as they are made. You can even rebase and force
>> push, and the PR will get rebased too. We do the first all the time,
>> and the second also,
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>
> Interesting. Where is this assignee field? Is it the assignee field in the
> Issues? Does setting that require that the committer be the assignee?
It's in the gray bar below the title for the PR. Anyone in the team
who owns the target r
Dear Group,
I’m in the ‘big data’ practice at Accenture and am also a big fan of
Sagemath, using it almost daily. I’ve recently started wondering what
interest you and the community would have in integrating Sagemath a
bit with Hadoop or another map-reduce framework so that operations
written in
John,
Just to confirm, did this build work for you on Lion 10.7.2, with
Xcode 4.3, and gcc version 4.2.1 (LLVM build 2336.9.00)? From you
follow-up messages I am assuming that beta4-gcc still builds a copy of
gcc-4.6 on top of everything else, correct?
I never was able to get clang to build sage
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:30, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> On Feb 21, 2012, at 08:13 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>> In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> Can we ge
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 14:00, entropy wrote:
> John,
>
> Just to confirm, did this build work for you on Lion 10.7.2, with
> Xcode 4.3, and gcc version 4.2.1 (LLVM build 2336.9.00)? From you
> follow-up messages I am assuming that beta4-gcc still builds a copy of
> gcc-4.6 on top of everything el
Hi all,
I finally could verify that the patch at trac 12161 is good, i.e.
heals not only the original problem for OS X 10.7, but the
"_PyUnicodeUCS4_AsUTF8String" incarnation, too (at least on one of my
own OS X 10.6 installations --- try starting a Sage "app" after
(closing all Sage and all termi
Jason Grout writes:
> On 2/21/12 12:19 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> Perhaps we could require that every state
>> of the main line be consistant, and if it's worthwhile to preserve
>> inconsistent history we merge it as a branch rather than rebasing.
>
> That seems very reasonable to me.
+1. IMO
On Feb 21, 2012, at 14:16 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:30, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 08:13 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
[snip]
>>> FYI, sqrt5 has been down for awhile since it is extremely prone to
>>> kernel panics and I have yet to figure out the i
On Tuesday, February 21, 2012 2:00:01 PM UTC-8, entropy wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Just to confirm, did this build work for you on Lion 10.7.2, with
> Xcode 4.3, and gcc version 4.2.1 (LLVM build 2336.9.00)?
I'm using Lion 10.7.3, not 10.7.2. I agree with the gcc version:
$ gcc --version
i686-app
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 15:37, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> On Feb 21, 2012, at 14:16 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:30, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>>>
>>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 08:13 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
> [snip]
FYI, sqrt5 has been down for awhile since it is extrem
On Feb 21, 2012, at 16:57 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 15:37, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 14:16 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:30, Justin C. Walker wrote:
On Feb 21, 2012, at 08:13 , R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>> [
On Feb 21, 6:20 pm, "Georg S. Weber"
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I finally could verify that the patch at trac 12161 is good, i.e.
> heals not only the original problem for OS X 10.7, but the
> "_PyUnicodeUCS4_AsUTF8String" incarnation, too (at least on one of my
> own OS X 10.6 installations --- try s
I didn't actually expect the following to work very well, but I definitely
did not expect the output that I did get:
sage: def IC9E(K, j, a, b, epsilon):
: g(t) = 2*pi*i * (a - i*a + 2*b*K + i*2*b*K)*(1+i)*t - (1+i)^2 *
2*i*b*t^2
: f(t) = t^j * exp(g(t))
: return integral(f
On Feb 21, 8:38 pm, Jonathan Bober wrote:
> I didn't actually expect the following to work very well, but I definitely
> did not expect the output that I did get:
>
> sage: def IC9E(K, j, a, b, epsilon):
> : g(t) = 2*pi*i * (a - i*a + 2*b*K + i*2*b*K)*(1+i)*t - (1+i)^2 *
> 2*i*b*t^2
> ..
> I think it's very appropriate to open a ticket for this. It would be
> even more appropriate to try to construct a more minimal
> counterexample :) but at least then we have it on the record.
So far the best I can do is
f(t) = e^(-(4.007 - 3*I)*t)
integral(f, (t, 0, infinity))
*boom*
and not
On Feb 21, 9:44 pm, "D. S. McNeil" wrote:
> > I think it's very appropriate to open a ticket for this. It would be
> > even more appropriate to try to construct a more minimal
> > counterexample :) but at least then we have it on the record.
>
> So far the best I can do is
>
> f(t) = e^(-(4.007
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:31 PM, David Roe wrote:
>> As for why your viewpoint might be harmful: I have heard anecdotes of
>> people
>> not wanting to release their code because it was ugly, or nonstandard, or
>> difficult to use, etc. As long as the response that they are going to
>> receive
>> i
Dear Young Number Theoretic Sage-Developers,
I'm co-organizing (with Brian Conrey, Chantal David, Wei Ho, Nina
Snaith, and Mike Rubinstein) an AMS Mathematics Research Community on
Arithmetic Statistics (=number theory) to be held June 24-30 in Snowbird, Utah.
Applications are due by **March 1**.
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 10:56 PM, 廖祥 wrote:
> Thanks to reply my message , and your constructive advises . I just have
> modified the document according to your suggestions , now this .rar file
> include the LaTeX source .
> In fact , if my translation can be release with Sage Official Doc ,
+1
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 2:52 AM, akm wrote:
> Dear Group,
>
> I’m in the ‘big data’ practice at Accenture and am also a big fan of
> Sagemath, using it almost daily. I’ve recently started wondering what
> interest you and the community would have in integrating Sagemath a
> bit with Hadoop or
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 at 09:44PM -0500, D. S. McNeil wrote:
> > I think it's very appropriate to open a ticket for this. It would be
> > even more appropriate to try to construct a more minimal
> > counterexample :) but at least then we have it on the record.
>
> So far the best I can do is
>
> f(
Hi,
> I’m in the ‘big data’ practice at Accenture and am also a big fan of
> Sagemath, using it almost daily. I’ve recently started wondering what
> interest you and the community would have in integrating Sagemath a
> bit with Hadoop or another map-reduce framework so that operations
> wri
39 matches
Mail list logo
