#9343: upgrade Pari to svn snapshot 12577 - a pre-release of Pari 2.4.3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Reporter: was
| Owner: jdemeyer
Type: enhancement
| Status: new
Priority: major
| Milestone: sage-4.6
Component: packages
| Keywords:
Author: Robert Bradshaw, John Cremona, Jeroen Demeyer, William Stein,
David Kirkby | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer:
| Merged:
Work_issues:
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Comment(by drkirkby):
Replying to [comment:172 jdemeyer]:
> Replying to [comment:169 drkirkby]:
> > There's no point keep testing the code, if the source gets updated.
> Well, I agree that we shouldn't upgrade the source all too often. But
if the PARI developers fix a bug that we found, that is a good reason to
update (and that is also why I updated to 12577).
I've changed the title to reflect more accurately what the ticket is. It's
'''not''' an update to version 2.4.3 of Pari. Version 2.4.2 has not even
been released - only an alpha of that is available
http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/pub/pari/testing/pari-2.4.2.alpha.tar.gz
This is an svn snapshot, but the ticket title implied something quite
different.
Note the developers guide says the date the snapshot was downloaded should
be in the package name. However, that seems to cause confusion to me, as
when people update the package, they keep changing the date, rather than
adding .p0, .p1, .p2 etc. In any case, different snapshots can exist on
the same day. Putting the actual snapshot number seems more sensible to
me. So I think it would be better if this was called pari-svn12577.spkg,
to reflect that fact it is a snapshot, and not a stable release as the
package name would imply. Otherwise follow the developers guide. IMHO,
this should not be called pari-2.4.3.
When 2.4.3 is released, it would seem sensible Pari is updated to a stable
release. But that's less likely to happen if people see from the package
name that we already have the latest release.
Of course, if the snapshot that's used gets updated, then that should be
reflected in the ticket title!
BTW, before thinking about updating the snapshot once again, take a read
of of the book [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month The
Mythical Man-Month] in particular one of the authors points
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-
Month#The_tendency_towards_irreducible_number_of_errors that in a suitably
complex system there is a certain irreducible number of errors. Any
attempt to fix observed errors tends to result in the introduction of
other errors.] I've certainly experienced this before many times -
including a previous snapshot on this very ticket.
Dave
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9343#comment:173>
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 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.
