On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> On 10/21/10 11:23 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:04:56 +0100
>> "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
>>
>>> Several categories have nobody at all assigned to them. Since I'm an
>>> admin on trac I can see this. These include:
Thanks, very reassuring. Perhaps it would be useful to make that more
clear at http://purple.sagemath.org/dsage.html (though that page
really seems to be more about the differences rather than relationship
between the two projects).
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:54 AM, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu,
On 10/21/10 11:23 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:04:56 +0100
"Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
Several categories have nobody at all assigned to them. Since I'm an
admin on trac I can see this. These include:
* cygwin
* debian-package
* distribution
* dsage
* experimen
On 10/21/10 11:23 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:04:56 +0100
"Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
Several categories have nobody at all assigned to them. Since I'm an
admin on trac I can see this. These include:
* cygwin
* debian-package
* distribution
* dsage
* experimen
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:23 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> Thus psage will be a superset of a subset of sage.
Yes.
> Do you envision a
> migration path of code from psage to sage?
Yes.
> (Perhaps not instigated or
> executed by the original authors of the code of course.)
Yes.
> Would it be
Very interesting thread, and I'm so pleased William shared some
thoughts vis-a-vis PSage. Regardless of whether he's spending more
time on PSage right now, I think that for many OSS projects it's
difficult to maintain momentum when the lead developer steps back a
fair amount.
Sage has done quite
On 10/21/10 5:55 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
IIRC, Jason suggested at some point to take a look at
http://www.reviewboard.org/
for patch reviews.
Here is one more possibility, though it may be too formal for our needs:
Java Code Review: http://jcodereview.sourceforge.net/
Jason
--
To post t
On 10/21/10 8:03 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
The week at a time approach you describe below is too much work for me.
I doubt if I could put in 2 hours of work for Sage everyday for a whole
week. I do however look at the new tickets on trac from time to time,
and wouldn't mind either classifying a f
On 10/21/10 5:55 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
I have grown very fond of the tracker used by Python recently:
http://roundup-tracker.org/
I like the fact that you can do everything via email. This feature
would provide an easy way to submit patches you're working on to the
issue trackers. We could j
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 22:24:13 -0700
William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Johan S. R. Nielsen
> > wrote:
> >> I think that Burcin's suggestion is excellent. Development of Sage
> >> should definitely move towards mor
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:08:12 -0700
William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:41 AM, kcrisman wrote:
> >
> >> Not to be overly pessimistic, but one metric we do not collect,
> >> but Google do for us, is the number of posts each month to
> >> sage-devel. There has been a very dramatic fal
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:04:56 +0100
"Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> To make matters easier to follow, lets look at Burcin's proposals.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/msg/40d2af34d86586de?hl=en
>
> and consider them, here in an abbreviated and expanded form.
>
> 1) Burcin said: "Many
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:24 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Johan S. R. Nielsen
>> wrote:
>>> I think that Burcin's suggestion is excellent. Development of Sage
>>> should definitely move towards more stru
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:24 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Johan S. R. Nielsen
>> wrote:
>>> I think that Burcin's suggestion is excellent. Development of Sage
>>> should definitely move towards more stru
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Johan S. R. Nielsen
> wrote:
>> I think that Burcin's suggestion is excellent. Development of Sage
>> should definitely move towards more structure, documentation, testing
>> and other software engineering
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Johan S. R. Nielsen
wrote:
> I think that Burcin's suggestion is excellent. Development of Sage
> should definitely move towards more structure, documentation, testing
> and other software engineering practices, but as for any Open Source-
> project, these things s
On 10/20/10 03:41 PM, kcrisman wrote:
Often bugs should really be in several categories, but one can only chose one.
IMHO it should be a tick-box, not a pull-down. If something with an elliptic
I didn't know this was possible on Trac; certainly this would overcome
a lot of problems. Likewi
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:41 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Often bugs should really be in several categories, but one can only chose
>> one.
>> IMHO it should be a tick-box, not a pull-down. If something with an elliptic
>
> I didn't know this was possible on Trac; certainly this would overcome
>
>
> Often bugs should really be in several categories, but one can only chose one.
> IMHO it should be a tick-box, not a pull-down. If something with an elliptic
I didn't know this was possible on Trac; certainly this would overcome
a lot of problems. Likewise, it would be nice to be able to be
I think that Burcin's suggestion is excellent. Development of Sage
should definitely move towards more structure, documentation, testing
and other software engineering practices, but as for any Open Source-
project, these things should come naturally as the project grows and
matures; as has already
I think that Burcin's suggestion is excellent. Development of Sage
should definitely move towards more structure, documentation, testing
and other software engineering practices, but as for any Open Source-
project, these things should come naturally as the project grows and
matures; as has already
On 10/20/10 10:37 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
The idea of having one piece of a Sage days devoted to
people sharing ideas from books they read in a coordinated way sounds
plausible as well, though probably it would really depend on the Sage
days in question.
That would sound good. If each person
> > The idea of having one piece of a Sage days devoted to
> > people sharing ideas from books they read in a coordinated way sounds
> > plausible as well, though probably it would really depend on the Sage
> > days in question.
>
> That would sound good. If each person read a chapter of a book on
On 10/19/10 05:06 PM, kcrisman wrote:
I was not suggesting anyone spend 10,000 hours studying the subject of
software engeering. I'm not suggesting people need to be experts. But
perhaps spending 20-50 hours on it is not unreasonable. I don't know
about you, but I've probably devoted 1000 hours
> I was not suggesting anyone spend 10,000 hours studying the subject of
> software engeering. I'm not suggesting people need to be experts. But
> perhaps spending 20-50 hours on it is not unreasonable. I don't know
> about you, but I've probably devoted 1000 hours to working on Sage, so
> 20-50 i
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Dr David Kirkby wrote:
> If that crashes Sage, and stops lots of people working on a
> Sage server, I think that's pretty serious, though not as bad as
> incorrect results.
It only crashes that one user's session. Each worksheet is run in a
different process.
--
On 18 Oct, 21:33, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
> > sage: seed(1,2)
> > sage: seed(100,34)
> > sage: seed(1,2,3,4,5,6,7)
>
> > will all crash Sage with an "Unhandled SIGSEGV". Plenty more sets of in
On Oct 16, 5:21 am, Burcin Erocal wrote:
>[...]
> if they are filed in different components. The members of the
> bug-wrangler mailing list will be able to see the initial report for
> every ticket, so they might recall a similar problem reported a few
> days ago.
>
> Another advantage is that t
> I would submit that practicing good software engineering techniques is
> more than a matter of finding the money (and especially time) to read
> a good book on it--we all have different priorities on what we can
> afford to spend "10,000 hours" on. (Note, I'm not saying it wouldn't
> be useful f
On 10/17/10 9:39 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
On 10/17/10 03:16 PM, Jan Groenewald wrote:
Hi
I believe any belief that having "bug hunt weeks" is a long term
solution is rather flawed. The issues should be tackled at an
earlier stage.
Despite not being a sufficient solution, are they not none
Hi, Burcin!
I think this is a great Idea!
I'm short on time in the next months, but
If I'm free again, could help with this.
greez,
Stefan
On 16 Okt., 14:21, Burcin Erocal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Motivated by the call for the bug days, here is an idea to manage the
> rapidly increasing number of "new"
31 matches
Mail list logo
