Chris, Thanks for your comments -- which will help keep people from getting the wrong impression by our "opinion piece" for the AMS. (Note that it is an "opinion piece" rather than an article, which problem means it is supposed to be biased...)
On 8/4/07, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (1) Saying I am an author of SAGE is misleading, How about if we say that SAGE is a "project started by the second author (Stein) in 2005 that combines together ..."? I actually wrote this in my version of the opinion piece, so you could copy it out of there. > (2) saying either William Stein or I would benefit > financially is misleading. > SAGE is free and we both spend > a lot of time on it (unpaid) that could be spent elsewhere, > as do all the developers I know of who volunteer on any > open source math program. I guess we could say that > by "support" we mean money to fund programming and > maintainance, but I think the last paragraph made that clear, > didn't it? We might benefit in that we could work on SAGE during the summer instead of -- e.g., -- teaching Calculus during the summer. The following is a bit of "devil's advocate". In the long run SAGE could in fact be a source of business opportunities for SAGE developers, e.g., in technical support contracts for universities that might deploy SAGE widely. This will only happen if SAGE becomes a truly viable alternative to Maple, Mathematica and Matlab, at least for education. And that might happen as a result of funding (though -- frankly -- I'm going to try as hard as I can to make it happen with or without funding). So in that rather indirect way SAGE developers like David Joyner and I may benefit financial from funding or support of SAGE. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > On 8/4/07, Chris Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > don't know if this is important: > > - i might have missed it, but the article doesn't seem to indicate > > that the authors of the article are also authors of sage (and would > > possibly benefit financially from ams support of sage) > > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 4:09 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > word count of about 800 > > > > > > On 8/4/07, Chris Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > what were the criteria? > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 3:48 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi: > > > > > > > > William Stein and I have written a > > > > > drafthttp://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wdj/research/oscas-ams-notices4.pdf > > > > > which seems suitable (based on suggestions and criteria given to us by > > > > > the editor > > > > > Andy Magid). Thoughts anyone? > > > > > > > > - David Joyner > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://www.williamstein.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
