On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Brian Granger ellisonbg@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I think what we should do is merge as much of SPD into Sage as
possible to lessen the maintainance burden. One thing I could see here
is to define SAGE_EXECUTABLE and you would just set it to spd in your
The build bits do not exist in ipython, but I think ipython should
have some good web notebook.
Sure, competition is good for business. I just don't think this code
is currently a priority for them and judging from the current
discussion about getting 0.10 out the door I don't see anyone
Well, I think what we should do is merge as much of SPD into Sage as
possible to lessen the maintainance burden. One thing I could see here
is to define SAGE_EXECUTABLE and you would just set it to spd in your
code.
I think this is a good idea. I think if SPD is kept separate, it will
end
On 04/17/09 15:05, mabshoff wrote:
On Apr 17, 2:25 am, Prabhu Ramachandran pra...@aero.iitb.ac.in
wrote:
On 04/17/09 13:37, mabshoff wrote:
If your plan is still to recreate all scripts to be BSD the above
would be more or less pointless, so you need to let us know what you
want to do. I
On Apr 21, 12:55 am, Prabhu Ramachandran pra...@aero.iitb.ac.in
wrote:
On 04/17/09 15:05, mabshoff wrote:
Hi Prabhu,
I think there was something on the scipy or numpy list about this
early this or late last week. It was about setuptools IIRC and might
have been part about the
On 04/21/09 13:31, mabshoff wrote:
Ok. I tried to find what I was thinking off and could not find it, so
it seems that my recollection was wrong, so mea culpa. Thanks for
pinging Enthought on this to set the record straight.
Not a problem. Thanks for all the excellent work on Sage!
cheers,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:21 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Apr 17, 12:09 am, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
Hi,
why is the notebook trying to execute sage that it finds in the
path, rather than another copy of the sage that it is running?
Because sage-env
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:07 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Apr 17, 12:58 am, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:21 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
SNIP
If SAGE_ROOT is already set sage aborts:
Ah, so I think I smell where the
On Apr 17, 2:04 am, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:07 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
SNIP
Well, I think what we should do is merge as much of SPD into Sage as
possible to lessen the maintainance burden. One thing I could see here
is to
On Apr 17, 2:25 am, Prabhu Ramachandran pra...@aero.iitb.ac.in
wrote:
On 04/17/09 13:37, mabshoff wrote:
If your plan is still to recreate all scripts to be BSD the above
would be more or less pointless, so you need to let us know what you
want to do. I really don't want to relicense my
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:33 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Apr 17, 2:04 am, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:07 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
SNIP
Well, I think what we should do is merge as much of SPD into Sage as
On Apr 17, 3:13 am, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:33 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
SNIP
Well, it would happen from my end. I think that in the process we
would do some serious cleanup, but the switch over should be quick
*if* we do it
On 04/17/09 13:37, mabshoff wrote:
If your plan is still to recreate all scripts to be BSD the above
would be more or less pointless, so you need to let us know what you
want to do. I really don't want to relicense my code in $SAGE_LOCAL/
bin/sage-$FOO to BSD since the EPD for example has
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:35 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
[...]
I am not sure what you refer to, but we either aren't taking about the
same thing or there is some misunderstanding.
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/a8d89440bdff814b/
What I would
14 matches
Mail list logo
