#6491: [with spkg, positive review pending] Modular Cohomology Rings of Finite
p-Groups
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner: SimonKing
Type: enhancement | Status: assigned
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.1.1
Component: optional packages | Keywords: cohomology ring finite p-group
Reviewer: | Author: Simon King
Merged: |
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Comment(by wdj):
Replying to [comment:20 SimonKing]:
> Replying to [comment:18 wdj]:
...
>
> > Since Meataxe is GPLv2 and you compile against it, your package is
GPLv2. I assume you are releasing your *code* under GPLv2+, but the
package itself inherits what Meataxe is. So, '''must''' is only if you
want your optional package to by GPLv2+. There are all kinds of licenses
in the optional spkg's though.
>
> OK. But then it is conflict with my SPKG.txt, isn't it?
Yes, the license of your package is still an issue. You can either (a)
rewrite SPKG.txt to say it is GPLv2, or (b) ask any surviving Meataxe
people you can find (maybe Alexander Hulpke or Thomas Breuer or other GAP
people know who to contact?) if they will relicense or dual-licence it as
GPLv2+ (at least the part of it that you use), then revise SPKG.txt after
that.
It would be helpful to have a README or something which explains where
what parts of your package go in what part of the Sage tree and what
license they have.
>
> > BTW, if you type
> >
> > {{{
> > Type: instance
> > Base Class: pGroupCohomology.CohomologyRingFactory
> > String Form: <pGroupCohomology.CohomologyRingFactory instance at
0x58075a8>
> > Namespace: Interactive
> > File: /home/wdj/sagefiles/sage-4.1.rc1/local/lib/python2.6
/site-packages/pGroupCohomology/__init__.py
> > Docstring
> >
> > Constructor for modular cohomology rings of finite p-groups
> >
> > <snip>
> > }}}
> > Are you happy with that File descriptor?
>
> What's wrong with it?
Well, I'm used to seeing __init__.py as a file which users don't read
which imports stuff from other modules that readers do read
(__mymodule__.py is more private than mymodule.py). Also, it's not very
descriptive. Still, it's up to you.
>
> > > __Tests__
> > >
> > > Did you run the test suite?
> >
...
>
> But something in the Ubuntu log irritates me: There is one example where
a wrong ring structure is found.
> Currently I have no time to analyse it further.
>
> By the way, there also is a test suite spkg-check-details, that does the
doc tests in a different way.
I posted the shell history to
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wdj/patches/cohomology-test-
details.log
If I read it correctly, all tests passed.
>
> > > __More Features__
> > >
...
>
> So, I think it would not hurt to keep it pending until my return end of
July.
> Or are there different opinions?
No problem. The end of July is fine.
>
> Cheers,
> Simon
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6491#comment:22>
Sage <http://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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
