[sage-devel] Re: inconsistent Sagemath doc licenses - a fix is needed

2016-12-08 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 8:41:55 PM UTC, mmarco wrote: > > If I am not mistaken, the reference manual is automatically built from the > docstrings in the source code files... which are GPL. How does that affect > the resulting documentation? > well, we merely do a kind of dual license

[sage-devel] Re: inconsistent Sagemath doc licenses - a fix is needed

2016-12-08 Thread mmarco
If I am not mistaken, the reference manual is automatically built from the docstrings in the source code files... which are GPL. How does that affect the resulting documentation? El jueves, 8 de diciembre de 2016, 17:17:19 (UTC+1), Dima Pasechnik escribió: > > As pointed out in > https://group

Re: [sage-devel] inconsistent Sagemath doc licenses - a fix is needed

2016-12-08 Thread Dima Pasechnik
OK, please see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22041 ---ready for review. On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 5:28:36 PM UTC, William wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > As pointed out in > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/n0B16q4h2c8/iHhDLRD5BwAJ >

Re: [sage-devel] inconsistent Sagemath doc licenses - a fix is needed

2016-12-08 Thread William Stein
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > As pointed out in > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/n0B16q4h2c8/iHhDLRD5BwAJ > various places in src/doc/ mention different (incompatible, according to > Debian people) licenses > for the documentation. > > We ought to do something

Re: [sage-devel] Re: License of the SageMath documentation

2016-12-08 Thread Tobias Hansen
On 12/08/2016 04:05 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 1:59:11 PM UTC, tha...@debian.org wrote: > > The GNU Free Documentation License is not considered a free license > by Debian. So if it's this, it can't be included in Debian. :( > > See > > htt

[sage-devel] inconsistent Sagemath doc licenses - a fix is needed

2016-12-08 Thread Dima Pasechnik
As pointed out in https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/n0B16q4h2c8/iHhDLRD5BwAJ various places in src/doc/ mention different (incompatible, according to Debian people) licenses for the documentation. We ought to do something about it. GFDL is only mentioned in src/doc/en/reference/histo

[sage-devel] Re: License of the SageMath documentation

2016-12-08 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 1:59:11 PM UTC, tha...@debian.org wrote: > > The GNU Free Documentation License is not considered a free license by > Debian. So if it's this, it can't be included in Debian. :( > > See > https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#GNU_Free_Documentation_License_.28GFD

[sage-devel] Re: License of the SageMath documentation

2016-12-08 Thread than...@debian.org
The GNU Free Documentation License is not considered a free license by Debian. So if it's this, it can't be included in Debian. :( See https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#GNU_Free_Documentation_License_.28GFDL.29 Am Sonntag, 4. Dezember 2016 21:45:27 UTC schrieb tha...@debian.org: > > Hi, > >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage for Windows installer (take 2)

2016-12-08 Thread Peter Luschny
> > What path did you install into? The default (under Program Files)? > > The program is installed in C:\Program Files\SageMath It was a one-click installation in which I did not intervene manually. Peter -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-deve

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Indexing Sage external packages (was: Giving back to the community)

2016-12-08 Thread Erik Bray
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 7:41 PM, William Stein wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: >> On 2016-12-07 14:52, Kwankyu Lee wrote: >>> >>> What do you think? >> >> >> Why do this? I guess this will mostly lead to bitrotting code that would >> better be merged into Sage. > > "

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage for Windows installer (take 2)

2016-12-08 Thread Erik Bray
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Peter Luschny wrote: > Hi Erik! > > The kernel dies on my system (64-bit Windows 10). > I enclose the trace. Thanks--this looks like the exact same problem Sebastien had, including the sys:1: RuntimeWarning: not adding directory '' to sys.path since it's writable

[sage-devel] Re: Sage for Windows installer (take 2)

2016-12-08 Thread Erik Bray
Thanks for the update! I'm glad it (mostly) worked for you. On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Jean THIERY wrote: > Hello Erik, > > Le 07/12/2016 à 16:39, Erik Bray a écrit : >> Hi all, >> >> TL;DR: if you have a 64-bit Windows (Windows 7 and up should work) >> please demo and give me your thought

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage for Windows installer (take 2)

2016-12-08 Thread Erik Bray
On Dec 7, 2016 20:18, "William Stein" wrote: Hi, I tried some random benchmarks and things look pretty good -- nothing I tried was disturbingly slow -- even pexpect is reasonable. Thanks, that's good to know. I wouldn't expect anything to be slow computation-wise--I *would* expect starting up

Re: [sage-devel] Sage for Windows installer (take 2)

2016-12-08 Thread Johan S . H . Rosenkilde
> TL;DR: if you have a 64-bit Windows (Windows 7 and up should work) > please demo and give me your thoughts on the new build of Sage for > Windows using the installer at [1]. Great work, Erik! Best, Johan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel