Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

I would like to say that we (we = the most part of French mathematicians) want to develop a computing facility based on Jupyter (jupyterhub, actually). For this, we will use a cluster of "second hand" machines (a cluster of machines which have been used some years for parallel computations (w

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

2015-12-19 10:23:58 -0800 (PST), kcrisman: > [Volker Braun wrote:] >> The switch [to Jupyter notebook as a default in SageMath] >> is now http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19740 (needs review) > > uh, that is a pretty big change. Is there any obvious/easy way > for people to migrate sws notebooks t

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

Does one need to use "from sage.all import *" or is Sage a "kernel" for >> Jupyter now? I guess I don't see what the advantages would be (though >> there may be some significant ones). >> > > How about you give it a try? Just run "sage --notebook=jupyter" instead > of "sage --notebook=sagen

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

On Saturday, December 19, 2015 at 7:23:58 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote: > > Does one need to use "from sage.all import *" or is Sage a "kernel" for > Jupyter now? I guess I don't see what the advantages would be (though > there may be some significant ones). > How about you give it a try? Just run

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 10:23 AM, kcrisman wrote: > >>> There are some things which don't work yet in Sage on Jupyter, for >>> example interacts. >> >> >> SageNB interacts don't work, but Jupyter interacts do. The syntax is >> slightly different but it would be easy enough to provide a compatibili

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

> There are some things which don't work yet in Sage on Jupyter, for >> example interacts. > > > SageNB interacts don't work, but Jupyter interacts do. The syntax is > slightly different but it would be easy enough to provide a compatibility > layer. > > The switch is now http://trac.sagemath.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

Hi, On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 08:14:42AM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > On 2015-12-18 07:05, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote: > >We also hope to upgrade pexpect and do some nice changes in SageNB, > >although 7.0 is probably a great version to consider switching default > >notebook to IPython/Jupiter. (But

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

On Friday, December 18, 2015 at 8:14:46 AM UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > There are some things which don't work yet in Sage on Jupyter, for > example interacts. SageNB interacts don't work, but Jupyter interacts do. The syntax is slightly different but it would be easy enough to provide a co

[sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

William Stein wrote: > +1 the version! Anticipating the next +1, Sage 11.0. -leif > On Thursday, December 17, 2015, Francois Bissey > > wrote: > > +1 > > On 18/12/2015, at 12:42, Volker Braun > wrote: > > > > Should we switch to 7.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

On 2015-12-18 07:05, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote: We also hope to upgrade pexpect and do some nice changes in SageNB, although 7.0 is probably a great version to consider switching default notebook to IPython/Jupiter. (But please keep shipping SageNB forever!) There are some things which don't wor

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

This seems like a good thread to think about the nontrivial backwards incompatible changes that are in our future: - The biggie is of course switching from Python 2.x to Python 3.x. - Making Jupyter notebook the default. - ??? William On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Andrey Novoseltsev

[sage-devel] Re: Sage-7.0 ?

We also hope to upgrade pexpect and do some nice changes in SageNB, although 7.0 is probably a great version to consider switching default notebook to IPython/Jupiter. (But please keep shipping SageNB forever!) On Thursday, 17 December 2015 16:42:44 UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote: > > Should we switc