#10963: More functorial constructions
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nthiery | Owner: stumpc5
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.1
Component: categories | Resolution:
Keywords: days54 | Merged in:
Authors: Nicolas M. Thiéry | Reviewers: Simon King, Frédéric
Report Upstream: N/A | Chapoton
Branch: | Work issues:
public/ticket/10963 | Commit:
Dependencies: #11224, #8327, | a410d05b692eead348214b0378dfc78113a3bf5a
#10193, #12895, #14516, #14722, | Stopgaps:
#13589, #14471, #15069, #15094, |
#11688, #13394, #15150 #15506 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by nbruin):
Replying to [comment:191 darij]:
> Either way I am worried about the branch-vs.-patch issue. If the branch
is not going to be merged into sage as it is, won't we get a rebase
cascade on all the branches that depend on it?
The branch may be based on an earlier version of sage, but that doesn't
preclude it from being merged into a later version without rebasing. There
may still be conflicts that need to be resolved, but a merge rather than a
rebase should allow git to be a lot more intelligent about what to do. The
same holds for other branches that are based off this one: On the whole, a
merge rather than rebase should pretty much limit problems to conflicts
that actually are conflicts.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10963#comment:193>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
