#16466: Add gambit as an optional package
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jcampbell | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: packages: | Resolution:
optional | Merged in:
Keywords: | Reviewers: Thierry Monteil
Authors: James Campbell | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 5470da3e66d90b58a526ffe1aebbf0108a578c1b
u/jcampbell/add_gambit_as_an_optional_package| Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by vinceknight):
Replying to [comment:23 kcrisman]:
> Wow, exactly the opposite. Huh.
>
Hi both, very strange that you're getting the weird behaviour.
Completely agree that it would be idea for this to just be 'a normal'
upstream binary of gambit but the reason it's this personalised version is
after conversation with the main gambit dev. There needed to be a slight
tweak to how the Python api worked, with a view to including this change
to future versions of gambit.
When it came to hosting it the gambit maintainer said it was best (I
forget if there was an actual reason) to just have it on my site. As a
point of action, I'll check some things with James and get in touch with
the gambit maintainer to see if we can fix this.
I'm beginning to wonder if since the main purpose of this is for #16333,
but that most of #16333 works without gambit, it would be possible to
modify/open new tickets so that #16333 can be review 'sans gambit' and a
new ticket is opened to take care of getting gambit as an optional package
in Sage and to check that the one implementation of the algorithm also
works.
>
> True, this is not so high priority yet especially as the branches are a
little mixed up.
Agree that this is not high priority based on above, I've left you a
message on #16331 re confusion of branches: not too sure what to do
there/here... I think we were quite eager to avoid a branch mess but might
have managed to create one anyway :) Sorry...
Thank you both very much for looking through this.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16466#comment:24>
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/d/optout.
