>>> As discussed in another thread [1]_ on sage-devel recently, I propose >>> changing our policy toward references: >>> >>> - all references should be put into a master bibliography file >>> >> >> There is one significant drawback to this: it will mean that a lot of >> ticket branches will be modifying this file, so merge conflicts between >> tickets may become more prevalent. If we can do something to ensure that >> resolving these merge conflicts is likely to fall within what standard >> merge strategies can do automatically we should probably do that.
Will it really be that bad? The proposed master bibliography is sorted alphabetically by first author, so conflicts should only occur when two tickets insert/modify citations right next to each other (or with perhaps 1 citation between them). With >1000 references right now, that's not going to cause too many extra conflicts, I think: If there's 1000 "equidistant" references and a single release has tickets that create 10 new random references (this is high, I think), then there's roughly 20% chance that 1 pair of these references will be within 1 of each other in the existing reference list. Dima Pasechnik writes: > I agree - however, perhaps it's better to think of using several bibtex > files (which is perfectly possible in LaTeX); e.g. one for number theory, > one for group theory, one for the commutative algebra, etc. Hmm, that seems complicated: Wouldn't many references naturally fall into multiple such categories, so every time you want to add a reference you would have to grep for it across all files. Best, Johan -- 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-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
