Hi
On Sat, 10 Sept 2022 at 21:32, Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
> A draft of the Trac-to-GitHub transition guide is now available at:
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/migration-from-trac-to-Git**b
>
> Please let me know what's missing or unclear.
>
Thank you for editing that!
The wiki page is
> I appreciate the efforts by Matthias and others to provide a roadmap for
the proposed transition.
+1
Nobody would buy a new house which has not been built yet without a good
animation of how it would look like.
> Is there more than "trac is what we're used to"? Can those who are
opposed pl
dim...@gmail.com schrieb am Sonntag, 11. September 2022 um 01:36:31 UTC+2:
>
>
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2022, 00:22 seb@gmail.com, wrote:
>
>> Matthias Koeppe schrieb am Samstag, 10. September 2022 um 21:32:50 UTC+2:
>>
>>> On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 8:12:48 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe
>>> wr
Considering the subsequent replies to my proposal, I'm perfectly happy with
implementing B_1 = +½ in Sage with the 1-year deprecation policy. During
the deprecation period I would expect an extra boolean keyword argument to
bernoulli() enforcing B_1 = +½ if true and relying on the backend librar
On Sun, 11 Sep 2022, 00:36 Dima Pasechnik, wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2022, 00:22 seb@gmail.com, wrote:
>
>> Matthias Koeppe schrieb am Samstag, 10. September 2022 um 21:32:50 UTC+2:
>>
>>> On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 8:12:48 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe
>>> wrote:
>>>
I've added a
On Sun, 11 Sep 2022, 00:22 seb@gmail.com, wrote:
> Matthias Koeppe schrieb am Samstag, 10. September 2022 um 21:32:50 UTC+2:
>
>> On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 8:12:48 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>>
>>> I've added a draft of a proposed workflow on GitHub with the idea to
>>> just fol
I have heard lots of support for moving to GitHub, and I do not really
understand the arguments against. Is there more than "trac is what we're
used to"? Can those who are opposed please articulate the reasons?
I appreciate the efforts by Matthias and others to provide a roadmap for
the propose
Matthias Koeppe schrieb am Samstag, 10. September 2022 um 21:32:50 UTC+2:
> On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 8:12:48 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>
>> I've added a draft of a proposed workflow on GitHub with the idea to just
>> follow the Trac workflow.
>> Help is welcome in adding links to
I think moving to GitHub makes total sense. Every other open-source math
project I use regularly is on GH, and there are big network-effect benefits
to being where everyone else is as others have already pointed out: easier
for others to contribute, easier to get credit for contributions, easie
On Sat, 10 Sept 2022 at 18:49, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2022 at 10:04 AM davida...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm curious if the change breaks any code anywhere else in Sage (e.g.,
> > > maybe for computing q-expansions of modular forms?)...
> >
> > You guessed right. I did a
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 8:12:48 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> I've added a draft of a proposed workflow on GitHub with the idea to just
> follow the Trac workflow.
> Help is welcome in adding links to documentation for the various bits.
>
> I think we can have a fleshed out Trac to
Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> OK, good point, and I agree. I'll work that into the wiki page.
Thanks!
--
Marc
--
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-de
On Sat, Sep 10, 2022 at 10:04 AM davida...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> > I'm curious if the change breaks any code anywhere else in Sage (e.g.,
> > maybe for computing q-expansions of modular forms?)...
>
> You guessed right. I did a quick local change to the bernoulli function and
> it indeed breaks
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 10:47:01 AM UTC-7 Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
> Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> > No, Issues are not just for bugs, they can also be used for planning
> > enhancements.
>
> Sure; the changes I was suggesting are an oversimplification. But I
> don't think we should keep w
Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> No, Issues are not just for bugs, they can also be used for planning
> enhancements.
Sure; the changes I was suggesting are an oversimplification. But I
don't think we should keep with the practice of forcing developers to
open a dedicated issue for every proposed change.
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 10:38:16 AM UTC-7 Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
> Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> > Yes, of course, and that's what I am documenting
> > at https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/migration-from-trac-to-Git**b
>
> Sorry, apparently I misunderstood your proposal.
>
> I would
Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> Yes, of course, and that's what I am documenting
> at https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/migration-from-trac-to-Git**b
Sorry, apparently I misunderstood your proposal.
I would suggest the following changes then:
"Instead of opening a Trac ticket"
--> "To report a bug,
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 10:30:32 AM UTC-7 Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
> Aram Dermenjian wrote:
> > In particular, github shows contributions made by a user to
> > various projects.
>
> This is true to some extent (only for commits as opposed to code review
> or other kinds of contributio
Aram Dermenjian wrote:
> In particular, github shows contributions made by a user to
> various projects.
This is true to some extent (only for commits as opposed to code review
or other kinds of contributions, and maybe only for users who have set
up their account in a certain way) even when the c
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 10:23:51 AM UTC-7 Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
> Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> > I've added a draft of a proposed workflow on GitHub with the idea to
> > just follow the Trac workflow.
I should have said "... to the extent that makes sense."
> In my eyes at least, it
Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> I've added a draft of a proposed workflow on GitHub with the idea to
> just follow the Trac workflow.
In my eyes at least, it is a defect of our current workflow that tickets
are used for tracking both bugs and proposed enhancements. On git**b,
wouldn't it be more natural
On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 12:08:38 PM UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 7:58 PM Thierry
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 04:07:48PM +0100, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> > [...]
> > >
> > > Several people promised to look for academic hosting for trac. Nothing
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 2:02:03 AM UTC-7 aram.derme...@gmail.com
wrote:
> I wanted to also bring up one (minor) positive for moving to github which
> is less technical. Moving to github would be a motivating factor for people
> to contribute to sagemath as it gives a pathway to work
On Sat, Sep 10, 2022 at 7:17 AM Jeremy Tan wrote:
>
> My name is Jeremy Tan, or Parcly Taxel in the furry/MLP art scene. As of this
> post I am a recent graduate from the National University of Singapore with
> two degrees in maths and computer science.
>
> Over the past month I had a good read
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 5:09:04 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> I've enabled wikis on our GitHub and started
>
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/migration-from-trac-to-Git**b
>
> Please feel free to add content there.
>
Thanks, Dima!
I've added a draft of a proposed workflow o
> Just to give a different perspective, from someone who is not a Sage
> developer but is a Sage donor, the only reason I give money to Sage every
> month is because I happened to see your appeal on GitHub.
Thank you very much for your donations.
> If you had no GitHub presence at all, I
>
>
> I really dislike Github's decentralized approach with PR and having to
>> have separate clones of the repo within each user. My understanding is if
>> two people have different fixes, then they individually submit PRs that are
>> not explicitly linked with each other, much less with a spe
For what it's worth, I think that Jan makes some very salient points, such
as
> I'd be happy to assist with self-hosting (so gitlab) and perhaps sponsor
a container (even a separate machine for CI) but I think the sagemath
project would probably be better off on git**b. I'm also hesitant to inv
My name is Jeremy Tan, or Parcly Taxel in the furry/MLP art scene. As of
this post I am a recent graduate from the National University of Singapore
with two degrees in maths and computer science.
Over the past month I had a good read of Peter Luschny's Bernoulli
Manifesto (http://luschny.de/math/z
Just to give a different perspective, from someone who is not a Sage
developer but is a Sage donor, the only reason I give money to Sage every
month is because I happened to see your appeal on GitHub. If you had no
GitHub presence at all, I likely would not be a donor. Not because I would
not
On Sat, 10 Sep 2022, 10:02 Aram Dermenjian,
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm only an occasional developer with sage, but I wanted to also bring up
> one (minor) positive for moving to github which is less technical. Moving
> to github would be a motivating factor for people to contribute to sagemath
> as
On Sat, 10 Sep 2022, 10:56 Jan Groenewald, wrote:
> Hi
>
> https://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracUsers
> In 2020, 21, 22, _only_ Edgewall & Trac-hacks (the trac people), and
> sagemath are listed as trac users bothering to update their details.
>
> I don't know how accurate the below articles are, b
On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 6:26:29 PM UTC+9 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
> Moving away from trac is basically a necessity now, as our devops are
breaking down for some time, and it only gets worse.
I wish that our trac survives the present crisis so that some people can
have enough time to pl
Hi
https://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracUsers
In 2020, 21, 22, _only_ Edgewall & Trac-hacks (the trac people), and
sagemath are listed as trac users bothering to update their details.
I don't know how accurate the below articles are, but found them intersting
to read. Would be interested in
comment
On Sat, 10 Sep 2022, 10:01 Mike, wrote:
> The sage cell server I'm using is sagecell.sagemath.org. Is there
> someone I should ask to apply that patch?
>
the main contact for this sagecell is listed there on the 1st page, at the
Problems section near the bottom.
> On Wednesday, September 7,
On Sat, 10 Sep 2022, 09:35 Vincent Delecroix, <20100.delecr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am in the same mood as Travis : if I was to consider a move to
> github I would like to have a clear and complete overview of the
> changes in the workflow (how do we set ticket dependencies? how
> revi
Hi all,
I'm only an occasional developer with sage, but I wanted to also bring up
one (minor) positive for moving to github which is less technical. Moving
to github would be a motivating factor for people to contribute to sagemath
as it gives a pathway to work in industry (programming) if they ch
The sage cell server I'm using is sagecell.sagemath.org. Is there someone
I should ask to apply that patch?
On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 4:23:37 PM UTC-4 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 9:14 PM Mike wrote:
> >
> > Since the referenced fix won't be available until sage-9.
Hello,
I am in the same mood as Travis : if I was to consider a move to
github I would like to have a clear and complete overview of the
changes in the workflow (how do we set ticket dependencies? how
reviews will work? management of releases? etc). For me the discussion
in this thread is very pre
On Sat, 10 Sep 2022, 05:48 Matthias Koeppe,
wrote:
> On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 9:34:16 PM UTC-7 Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
>> I really dislike Github's decentralized approach with PR and having to
>> have separate clones of the repo within each user. My understanding is if
>> two people have
On Sat, 10 Sep 2022, 05:34 'Travis Scrimshaw' via sage-devel, <
sage-devel@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> I really dislike Github's decentralized approach with PR and having to
> have separate clones of the repo within each user. My understanding is if
> two people have different fixes, then they indi
41 matches
Mail list logo
