#17898: Removal of wrong stopgap
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: aschilling | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.6
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: stopgap, | Merged in:
partitions | Reviewers: Travis Scrimshaw
Authors: Anne Schilling | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 39142901893bc0207e8271ccd4772469fe958e0f
public/ticket/17898 | Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
Hello Anne,
> It just scares users unnecessarily.
I totally agree with that.
I asked in my earlier comment whether you could, instead of removing the
stopgap, only raise it in case that have not been checked for correctness.
I do not understand why this proposal has been ignored. To me, it sounds
like the best way out: you would not see it in case for which you know the
code is correct, and we would see it when there is a risk. Isn't it all
good for everyone?
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17898#comment:11>
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.
