[sage-devel] Re: Decision making (refuse to vote)
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 3:17:22 AM UTC+1, Thierry (sage-googlesucks@xxx) wrote: Hi again, c. [everything else deleted, though I agree with much, not with some] I don't know if this will reassure you, but (a) I voted no, and (b) given how William seemed to listen change course on collecting votes [1, 2] I am less worried about being on the losing side (which it looks like right now). I am confident that, if you or other people have concrete proposals for amending the code/guidelines/etc., they will be taken seriously, at least by William. The unfortunate fact is that some people already feel excluded from the community, with or without a vote. Having read some of the threads in question, I *suspect* it's because certain male developers communicate in a vigorous style which intimidates other developers (male female). Given the situation, consensus is already impossible; division pre-exists the vote. So it's incorrect to say that the vote *causes* a division in the community; if you read that thread carefully, you'd see the division is already there. If I may be allowed some levity: I suppose William may be unconsciously patriarchal paternalistic -- he is male, after all -- but I don't think he'd be so deliberately, unless it was with his children. :-) Sage is, in a way, a child of his. sincerely john perry [1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/iGxa2F01rFc/df6sN_F6vp8J [2] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/iGxa2F01rFc/7gxoweTG0oYJ (hope the links work; I haven't done that in a while, maybe ever) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Decision making (refuse to vote)
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 5:30:07 AM UTC+1, Andrew wrote: Also, Vicent has created a wiki page http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.sagemath.org%2FSageCommunityProposalsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNElD7cUsIZNGW868o7Pd5nEfqAjfw with the express purpose of discussing and reaching consensus on the text. I missed that. Is there a place for discussion? I have a suggestion that I think most people would accept, and on Wikipedia there's usually a discussion page, but I don't see one here. john perry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: code of conduct - ends Monday at midnight, PST.
[x ] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: Do we have a make target to clean upstream directory?
It is hard enough to clean it properly. If you have ideas, please see http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16327 On Monday, November 24, 2014 10:41:17 PM UTC+8, kcrisman wrote: As time goes it gets bigger and bigger... +1 (only if it is documented properly!) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct
On 2014-11-22, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk wrote: --089e0112ca127c6d2105087a3eb8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 21 Nov 2014 22:22, Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com wrote: I'd say it's OK to have such a code, but it's not really OK to actively enforce it. Such an active enforcement would only be counterproductive, if not outright impossible. Dima Is there any point in having something that is not enforced? That would just seem a waste of time to me. I note that you used the word active a couple of times. Do you think a code of conduct would lead to any benefits due to passive means, and if so how? I meant that only really gross violations will be dealt with. Many people want a code; enforcing is another story. Perhaps the Dutch way would be the best... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedogen Dima Dave. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: code of conduct - ends Monday at midnight, PST.
On 2014-11-23, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Sage Developers, This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of conduct. I will close voting on Monday at midnight PST. (If the vote is an exact tie, then that means No - there must be a simple majority for this to pass.) Any member of the sage-devel mailing list may vote or abstain.I will delete any messages in this thread that is not a vote -- if you want to make further arguments for or against, do so elsewhere. [X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below Dima -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Cygwin(64) port status
Hi all, With http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649 and http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 which need reviews and touch Cygwin-only code we'll (almost) have support to build Sage trivially (type make) on Cygwin (again) and Cygwin64 (for the first time). Only the MPIR update at http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15015 will be missing for Cygwin64. It is ready for merging, but it may need some more discussion before being merged. Best, JP -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: code of conduct - ends Monday at midnight, PST.
Hi, I just counted and I get: [x] Yes -- got 19 votes [x] No -- got 15 votes + 2 late votes Can somebody count and confirm this? -- William On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-11-23, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Sage Developers, This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of conduct. I will close voting on Monday at midnight PST. (If the vote is an exact tie, then that means No - there must be a simple majority for this to pass.) Any member of the sage-devel mailing list may vote or abstain.I will delete any messages in this thread that is not a vote -- if you want to make further arguments for or against, do so elsewhere. [X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below Dima -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: code of conduct - ends Monday at midnight, PST.
I counted the same. Cheers, Viviane 2014-11-25 16:33 GMT+01:00 William Stein wst...@gmail.com: Hi, I just counted and I get: [x] Yes -- got 19 votes [x] No -- got 15 votes + 2 late votes Can somebody count and confirm this? -- William On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-11-23, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Sage Developers, This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of conduct. I will close voting on Monday at midnight PST. (If the vote is an exact tie, then that means No - there must be a simple majority for this to pass.) Any member of the sage-devel mailing list may vote or abstain.I will delete any messages in this thread that is not a vote -- if you want to make further arguments for or against, do so elsewhere. [X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below Dima -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: code of conduct - ends Monday at midnight, PST.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Viviane Pons vivianep...@gmail.com wrote: I counted the same. Thank you. This means that the code of conduct passes, and the SageMath project now has an official code of conduct. If you voted the other way, please respect that this is what the majority of people who voted want, even if the code isn't perfect. This vote was extremely close. I kept the voting simple and consistent with how we've done all past votes, rather than using a more complicated voting system, since I didn't want to make even the voting process itself contentious. For those who feel the stated code should be rewritten/modified/rethought, etc., I encourage you to work on this. If there is a new proposal, we can certainly vote on it later. -- William I just counted and I get: [x] Yes -- got 19 votes [x] No -- got 15 votes + 2 late votes Can somebody count and confirm this? -- William On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-11-23, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Sage Developers, This is a simple majority vote for the original proposed code of conduct. I will close voting on Monday at midnight PST. (If the vote is an exact tie, then that means No - there must be a simple majority for this to pass.) Any member of the sage-devel mailing list may vote or abstain.I will delete any messages in this thread that is not a vote -- if you want to make further arguments for or against, do so elsewhere. [X] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below Dima -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: code of conduct - ends Monday at midnight, PST.
This means that the code of conduct passes, and the SageMath project now has an official code of conduct. If you voted the other way, please respect that this is what the majority of people who voted want, even if the code isn't perfect. Perhaps it is now time to share with us who took the initiative of writing such a code and who participated to its writing ? You know All Sage files need a copyright header with a data and email, so even if this does not appear on our git server Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] What to do with sage-abuse
Hi all, one of the questions that was raised by Thierry and not answered (there were other non answered questions but I'm interested in this one in particular) is who is in charge of sage-ab...@googlegroups.com? The code stated that the group administrators shall consider the issue but I find this quite restrictive and not in the spirit of the community. Does anyone have another suggestion for this? Cheers Viviane -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
one of the questions that was raised by Thierry and not answered (there were other non answered questions but I'm interested in this one in particular) is who is in charge of sage-...@googlegroups.com javascript:? The code stated that the group administrators shall consider the issue but I find this quite restrictive and not in the spirit of the community. Does anyone have another suggestion for this? Well, since you are worried about the community spirit of sage-abuse, a good way to deal with that would be to make this google group public. There is nothing specified against that in the code that was adopted, so we have some freedom here. And given that the code states that only administrators will decide, this forum can probably be kept read-only for everybody, except for the owners. Obviously messages from non-administrators will be accepted one-by-one, as if nobody but administrators can write there it is rather useless to write to sage-abuse. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
Err, sorry, forgot something: and of course the debates between administrators should happen on this mailing-list, or there is no point. I do not know how courts work in the US, but in France anybody can enter a court and hear what is being said. Public trials is what prevents (to some extent) the people from thinking that justice is given. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
Yes, having it public seems a good idea to me. I'm not sure about the read-only, for me this list could be a place where you can just send a message to the community as a whole to point out a thread going out of hand. (For example, I don't read all threads, so I wouldn't always know). There is no question of having a court! And administrators shouldn't be judges. 2014-11-25 17:20 GMT+01:00 Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com: Err, sorry, forgot something: and of course the debates between administrators should happen on this mailing-list, or there is no point. I do not know how courts work in the US, but in France anybody can enter a court and hear what is being said. Public trials is what prevents (to some extent) the people from thinking that justice is given. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] What to do with sage-abuse
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 05:06:25PM +0100, Viviane Pons wrote: Hi all, one of the questions that was raised by Thierry and not answered (there were other non answered questions but I'm interested in this one in particular) is who is in charge of sage-ab...@googlegroups.com? The code stated that the group administrators shall consider the issue but I find this quite restrictive and not in the spirit of the community. I have never asked such a question, please do not hijack my name to build the police of your State, and re-read my e-mail if necessary. Ciao, Thierry Does anyone have another suggestion for this? Cheers Viviane -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
Here is an additional way to preserve the community spirit: After their discussion on sage-abuse, the administrators will reach a verdict. I assume that the judges will be carefully selected among the members of the community, yet their verdict will be pronounced on behalf of the community. Hence, we could do like for this very code: the verdict reached by the members of the jury could be presented to the community, and people would vote Yes/No to apply it. This way the decision would be taken by the community again, even though the wording (like for this code) and the choice of the sentence would only be the one of a reduced set of persons. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Cygwin(64) port status
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:46 AM, Jean-Pierre Flori jpfl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, With http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649 and http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 which need reviews and touch Cygwin-only code we'll (almost) have support to build Sage trivially (type make) on Cygwin (again) and Cygwin64 (for the first time). Only the MPIR update at http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15015 will be missing for Cygwin64. It is ready for merging, but it may need some more discussion before being merged. Nice! Well done to those of you who have been working on the Cygwin port. David Best, JP -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
Honestly guys, nobody ever spoke of police and judges and jury... Thierry, sorry to have misused your name. At some point, you had some concerns about a list of 12 guys taking all the decisions and that's what raised my own concern about the the mailing list (sorry for the short-cut). Cheers Viviane 2014-11-25 17:34 GMT+01:00 Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com: Here is an additional way to preserve the community spirit: After their discussion on sage-abuse, the administrators will reach a verdict. I assume that the judges will be carefully selected among the members of the community, yet their verdict will be pronounced on behalf of the community. Hence, we could do like for this very code: the verdict reached by the members of the jury could be presented to the community, and people would vote Yes/No to apply it. This way the decision would be taken by the community again, even though the wording (like for this code) and the choice of the sentence would only be the one of a reduced set of persons. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Cygwin(64) port status
With http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649 and http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 which need reviews and touch Cygwin-only code we'll (almost) have support to build Sage trivially (type make) on Cygwin (again) and Cygwin64 (for the first time). Only the MPIR update at http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15015 will be missing for Cygwin64. It is ready for merging, but it may need some more discussion before being merged. Nice! Well done to those of you who have been working on the Cygwin port. David Yes, congrats! Sorry I haven't been able to help much the past year or more. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Cygwin(64) port status
Note that everything gets built, but at this point I don't promise it is really functional. Cygwin32 should be almost fully functional. Cygwin64 is very far from it (e.g. PARI builds but seems completely broken: it says 131 is not prime). Anyway getting back to a point where just typing make would finish without errors and build everything without requiring human interaction was a first step before debugging libraries behaving badly.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
On 2014-11-25, Viviane Pons vivianep...@gmail.com wrote: --089e011848104c327b0508b1a1fd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Honestly guys, nobody ever spoke of police and judges and jury... Thierry, sorry to have misused your name. At some point, you had some concerns about a list of 12 guys taking all the decisions and that's what raised my own concern about the the mailing list (sorry for the short-cut). If it comes to actual creation of sage-abuse, my first complaint will be about the way this vote was conducted. Feeling like back in the USSR, Dima Cheers Viviane 2014-11-25 17:34 GMT+01:00 Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com: Here is an additional way to preserve the community spirit: After their discussion on sage-abuse, the administrators will reach a verdict. I assume that the judges will be carefully selected among the members of the community, yet their verdict will be pronounced on behalf of the community. Hence, we could do like for this very code: the verdict reached by the members of the jury could be presented to the community, and people would vote Yes/No to apply it. This way the decision would be taken by the community again, even though the wording (like for this code) and the choice of the sentence would only be the one of a reduced set of persons. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: one of the questions that was raised by Thierry and not answered (there were other non answered questions but I'm interested in this one in particular) is who is in charge of sage-...@googlegroups.com? The code stated that the group administrators shall consider the issue but I find this quite restrictive and not in the spirit of the community. Does anyone have another suggestion for this? Well, since you are worried about the community spirit of sage-abuse, a good way to deal with that would be to make this google group public. There is nothing specified against that in the code that was adopted, so we have some freedom here. And given that the code states that only administrators will decide, this forum can probably be kept read-only for everybody, except for the owners. Obviously messages from non-administrators will be accepted one-by-one, as if nobody but administrators can write there it is rather useless to write to sage-abuse. Hi Nathann, I created sage-abuse I think following your suggestions to the letter: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/sage-abuse Anybody can post there, but to avoid spam we have to approve posts by non-members. Everything there is publicly visible. -- William Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:07 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: one of the questions that was raised by Thierry and not answered (there were other non answered questions but I'm interested in this one in particular) is who is in charge of sage-...@googlegroups.com? The code stated that the group administrators shall consider the issue but I find this quite restrictive and not in the spirit of the community. Does anyone have another suggestion for this? Well, since you are worried about the community spirit of sage-abuse, a good way to deal with that would be to make this google group public. There is nothing specified against that in the code that was adopted, so we have some freedom here. And given that the code states that only administrators will decide, this forum can probably be kept read-only for everybody, except for the owners. Obviously messages from non-administrators will be accepted one-by-one, as if nobody but administrators can write there it is rather useless to write to sage-abuse. Hi Nathann, I created sage-abuse I think following your suggestions to the letter: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/sage-abuse Anybody can post there, but to avoid spam we have to approve posts by non-members. Everything there is publicly visible. And if anybody would like to volunteer to be a manager of the group (to approve non-spam), let me know and I'll add them. William -- William Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:10 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:07 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: one of the questions that was raised by Thierry and not answered (there were other non answered questions but I'm interested in this one in particular) is who is in charge of sage-...@googlegroups.com? The code stated that the group administrators shall consider the issue but I find this quite restrictive and not in the spirit of the community. Does anyone have another suggestion for this? Well, since you are worried about the community spirit of sage-abuse, a good way to deal with that would be to make this google group public. There is nothing specified against that in the code that was adopted, so we have some freedom here. And given that the code states that only administrators will decide, this forum can probably be kept read-only for everybody, except for the owners. Obviously messages from non-administrators will be accepted one-by-one, as if nobody but administrators can write there it is rather useless to write to sage-abuse. Hi Nathann, I created sage-abuse I think following your suggestions to the letter: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/sage-abuse Anybody can post there, but to avoid spam we have to approve posts by non-members. Everything there is publicly visible. And if anybody would like to volunteer to be a manager of the group (to approve non-spam), let me know and I'll add them. I volunteer. William -- William Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 5:34:16 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: I assume that the judges will be carefully selected among the members of the community, ... To repeat my idea from the escalated thread: each judge could have support from the community, e.g. needs at least N supporters (my N was 5) from the community to have enough weight to their actions. But in general I'm against such ad-hoc rulings and -- well -- my stance is that community management is a perpetual ongoing process. There is no way how this can be codified. What's happening is that our collective memory is shaped in a certain way and we exchange ideas and visions in order to steer the ship. -- H -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)
On 25 November 2014 at 01:11, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org
wrote:
...
I am not very interested in real numbers. I am interested in the
algebra. Would you say that
sqrt(x^2).diff(x) = sqrt(x^2)/x
is OK?
I think so, using the following calculation:
sqrt(x^2).diff(x) = exp(1/2*log(x^2)).diff(x) = exp(1/2*log(x^2)) *
1/2 * 1/x^2 * 2*x = sqrt(x^2)/x
The function exp(1/2*log(x^2)) that we differentiate is analytic, so I
don't see any issue here.
I did not ask whether it was technically correct or not. What I meant
was is this expression what you would expect given the rest of the
machinery of differentiation in any given computer algebra system?
But I don't want to be forced to make a choice of branch until
I actually need to evaluate an expression numerically.
I understand that's what you want. I am just trying to understand how
exactly this works.
OK.
...
I think what you are trying to say is
(A) log(exp(z)) = { z + 2*pi*i*n | for all n in Integer}
Exactly, that's what I meant.
...
Although it may seem simple in this case, in general implementing
sets with comprehension like this requires logic and takes us
outside of algebra as such into the realm of theorem proving.
Sure. But that's what you want, correct?
No, not at all. I want this to be algebraic, not some theorem of
predicate calculus. That is what I meant by taking
x + conjugate(x)
as the definition of a real valued variable.
...
This is precisely the part that I don't understand with the approach
(A). log(a*b), log(a) and log(b) are all multivalued, so you would
naively think, that log(a*b)-log(a)-log(b) = 0 + 2*pi*i*n, for all
n. But I think this is not the case, I think the n in log(a*b) is
coupled to the implicit n in log(a) and log(b) in such a way, that
the result is exactly 0. Can you clarify exactly how this works?
Try it this way:
a*b = exp(?1)
a = exp(?2)
b = exp(?3)
I think 'normalize' is saying that there is a solution that makes
?1 - ?2 - ?3 = 0.
Ok, but why wouldn't normalize return 2*pi*i instead? Or 4*pi*i?
These are equivalent in the sense of having the same number of
algebraically independent transcendental kernels, i.e. none.
In other words, how exactly are the operations on the multivalued
sets log(x) defined?
FriCAS does not perform operations on multivalued sets to determine the above.
I meant that I did not understand what you are proposing for how to
represent the value of 'log(z)' symbolically, i.e. when the value of z
is unknown.
Ah ok. I would represent it by the approach (B). But then, as we
talked about, it's not true that conjugate(log(z)) = log(conjugate(z)).
Since you want this property to hold, then the approach (B) does
not work for you, obviously. So I am trying to understand how
exactly are all the operations defined in your approach. You said
your approach is not (A) exactly. So I am just trying to understand.
OK.
This discussion is about how a CAS should handle (complex)
differentiation. Since it started here, I would finish it here, so
that the whole thread is in one mailinglist for future reference.
OK. It would be nice to know if other sage-devel subscribers actually
remain interested...
Let's return to differentiation for a moment. Using your definitions
what would you say is the correct result for
log(exp(z-conjugate(z))).diff(z)
My patched version of FriCAS based your definition in this thread
currently returns 0. Do you get the same result?
Since the derivative is 0 would we want to say therefore that
log(exp(z-conjugate(z)))
is a constant? If not, isn't this an argument for needing another
derivative? The result of this test currently causes a problem during
manipulations of expressions of this form. Check the two Wirtinger
derivatives for this case. If we have both derivatives we can avoid
this problem quite easily as my previous version of the patch showed.
Bill.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-devel group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)
This discussion is about how a CAS should handle (complex) differentiation. Since it started here, I would finish it here, so that the whole thread is in one mailinglist for future reference. OK. It would be nice to know if other sage-devel subscribers actually remain interested... In the hopes that eventually something correct gets into Sage, absolutely. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
On 2014-11-25, Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote: But in general I'm against such ad-hoc rulings This seems at odds with what is written below ... and -- well -- my stance is that community management is a perpetual ongoing process. There is no way how this can be codified. What's happening is that our collective memory is shaped in a certain way and we exchange ideas and visions in order to steer the ship. That seems an argument in favor of ad-hoc rulings; incidentally this is an excellent statement of my own point of view (not that it matters too much). best Robert Dodier -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
On 25 November 2014 at 01:11, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org
wrote:
...
I am not very interested in real numbers. I am interested in the
algebra. Would you say that
sqrt(x^2).diff(x) = sqrt(x^2)/x
is OK?
I think so, using the following calculation:
sqrt(x^2).diff(x) = exp(1/2*log(x^2)).diff(x) = exp(1/2*log(x^2)) *
1/2 * 1/x^2 * 2*x = sqrt(x^2)/x
The function exp(1/2*log(x^2)) that we differentiate is analytic, so I
don't see any issue here.
I did not ask whether it was technically correct or not. What I meant
was is this expression what you would expect given the rest of the
machinery of differentiation in any given computer algebra system?
Ah ok. I would actually expect to get x/sqrt(x^2), which is equivalent.
But I don't want to be forced to make a choice of branch until
I actually need to evaluate an expression numerically.
I understand that's what you want. I am just trying to understand how
exactly this works.
OK.
...
I think what you are trying to say is
(A) log(exp(z)) = { z + 2*pi*i*n | for all n in Integer}
Exactly, that's what I meant.
...
Although it may seem simple in this case, in general implementing
sets with comprehension like this requires logic and takes us
outside of algebra as such into the realm of theorem proving.
Sure. But that's what you want, correct?
No, not at all. I want this to be algebraic, not some theorem of
predicate calculus. That is what I meant by taking
x + conjugate(x)
as the definition of a real valued variable.
Ok.
...
This is precisely the part that I don't understand with the approach
(A). log(a*b), log(a) and log(b) are all multivalued, so you would
naively think, that log(a*b)-log(a)-log(b) = 0 + 2*pi*i*n, for all
n. But I think this is not the case, I think the n in log(a*b) is
coupled to the implicit n in log(a) and log(b) in such a way, that
the result is exactly 0. Can you clarify exactly how this works?
Try it this way:
a*b = exp(?1)
a = exp(?2)
b = exp(?3)
I think 'normalize' is saying that there is a solution that makes
?1 - ?2 - ?3 = 0.
Ok, but why wouldn't normalize return 2*pi*i instead? Or 4*pi*i?
These are equivalent in the sense of having the same number of
algebraically independent transcendental kernels, i.e. none.
I don't understand that. Is the result of normalize() multivalued?
Or how else could 0 be equivalent to 2*pi*i or 4*pi*i?
In other words, how exactly are the operations on the multivalued
sets log(x) defined?
FriCAS does not perform operations on multivalued sets to determine the above.
Ok. Though my question stands, how are the operations defined in your approach?
I meant that I did not understand what you are proposing for how to
represent the value of 'log(z)' symbolically, i.e. when the value of z
is unknown.
Ah ok. I would represent it by the approach (B). But then, as we
talked about, it's not true that conjugate(log(z)) = log(conjugate(z)).
Since you want this property to hold, then the approach (B) does
not work for you, obviously. So I am trying to understand how
exactly are all the operations defined in your approach. You said
your approach is not (A) exactly. So I am just trying to understand.
OK.
This discussion is about how a CAS should handle (complex)
differentiation. Since it started here, I would finish it here, so
that the whole thread is in one mailinglist for future reference.
OK. It would be nice to know if other sage-devel subscribers actually
remain interested...
Let's return to differentiation for a moment. Using your definitions
what would you say is the correct result for
log(exp(z-conjugate(z))).diff(z)
My patched version of FriCAS based your definition in this thread
currently returns 0. Do you get the same result?
No, the derivative is most definitely not zero:
log(exp(z-conjugate(z))).diff(z) =
exp(z-conjugate(z))/exp(z-conjugate(z)) * [1 - 1*exp(-2*i*theta)] = 1
- exp(-2*i*theta)
In other words, the two Wirtinger derivatives are 1 and -1. You can
easily check numerically that this formula is correct for all complex
x and angles theta, I've done it here:
https://github.com/certik/theoretical-physics/blob/f9406a02ef8e04b2daa669f444148186b6b892e8/src/math/code/test_complex_diff.py#L118
and it works.
Since the derivative is 0 would we want to say therefore that
log(exp(z-conjugate(z)))
is a constant?
If you got 0, then I think you can say that the function is constant.
We didn't get 0, so the function is not constant.
If not, isn't this an argument for needing another
derivative?
In some of your previous emails you wrote that this theta factor
still looks ugly to you. Maybe it's ugly, but it's correct, as you
fell into this trap yourself: if you omit theta and implicitly assume
Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:30:33 -0500
Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
On 25 November 2014 at 01:11, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org
wrote:
...
But I don't want to be forced to make a choice of branch until
I actually need to evaluate an expression numerically.
I understand that's what you want. I am just trying to understand how
exactly this works.
OK.
Without a choice of branch for sqrt, I cannot answer this question:
* Is there complex number x such that x*conjugate(x) equals sqrt(2)?
This seems a non-numerical question to me. It seems to me that sqrt
without a choice of branch is ill-defined, but perhaps it is
sufficiently well-defined if you restrict to a certain kind of
questions? If so, what questions can I ask? I think I know too
little about the subject of this thread and of FriCAS.
...
I think what you are trying to say is
(A) log(exp(z)) = { z + 2*pi*i*n | for all n in Integer}
Exactly, that's what I meant.
...
Although it may seem simple in this case, in general implementing
sets with comprehension like this requires logic and takes us
outside of algebra as such into the realm of theorem proving.
Sure. But that's what you want, correct?
No, not at all. I want this to be algebraic, not some theorem of
predicate calculus. That is what I meant by taking
x + conjugate(x)
as the definition of a real valued variable.
Do you mean that z is considered real-valued when there is x such that x
+ conjugate(x) is z? I got lost in this part of the thread.
...
This is precisely the part that I don't understand with the approach
(A). log(a*b), log(a) and log(b) are all multivalued, so you would
naively think, that log(a*b)-log(a)-log(b) = 0 + 2*pi*i*n, for all
n. But I think this is not the case, I think the n in log(a*b) is
coupled to the implicit n in log(a) and log(b) in such a way, that
the result is exactly 0. Can you clarify exactly how this works?
Try it this way:
a*b = exp(?1)
a = exp(?2)
b = exp(?3)
I think 'normalize' is saying that there is a solution that makes
?1 - ?2 - ?3 = 0.
Ok, but why wouldn't normalize return 2*pi*i instead? Or 4*pi*i?
These are equivalent in the sense of having the same number of
algebraically independent transcendental kernels, i.e. none.
Am I understanding correctly that normalize picks some arbitrary
representant of an equivalence class of answers? That seems scary to
me, but perhaps it is sufficiently well-defined for some questions?
...
This discussion is about how a CAS should handle (complex)
differentiation. Since it started here, I would finish it here, so
that the whole thread is in one mailinglist for future reference.
OK. It would be nice to know if other sage-devel subscribers actually
remain interested...
Yes, I find this thread casually interesting. However, I know little of
the subject of or FriCAS, which is also the reason I did not write
before.
Let's return to differentiation for a moment. Using your definitions
what would you say is the correct result for
log(exp(z-conjugate(z))).diff(z)
My patched version of FriCAS based your definition in this thread
currently returns 0. Do you get the same result?
I'm not interested enough to calculate this by hand, sorry.
Since the derivative is 0 would we want to say therefore that
log(exp(z-conjugate(z)))
is a constant? If not, isn't this an argument for needing another
derivative? The result of this test currently causes a problem during
manipulations of expressions of this form. Check the two Wirtinger
derivatives for this case. If we have both derivatives we can avoid
this problem quite easily as my previous version of the patch showed.
The Wikipedia page suggests that df/d conjugate(z) is
conjugate(conjugate(f).diff(z)). If that is indeed the case, then it
seems that df/d conjugate(z) might be handled without implementing a
second diff-method.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-devel group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status
The result of the compilation is relocatable? I mean, would it be eventually possible to have something that windows users just unzip and runs? Or would they always need to compile it? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: What to do with sage-abuse
Hi! Does anyone have another suggestion for this? William had posted this at some point in the long thread: Since I attempted to retract this proposal in light of Volker's sensible criticism, and people keep responding as if I didn't, let me officially retract this proposal. Instead I support what I think Volker suggested, which is using our existing completely open voting process on sage-devel, as we have been doing for years, for sage-abuse issues. But to make it clear that we care about sage-abuse issues and make clear the existence of sage-flame. This would mean it is a community decision and discussion and not done by group of select people. Best, Anne -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] When/by who/how was the code of conduct initiated ?
Hello everybody, I created this thread because this question was asked several times, that I am sure everybody saw it, and that it still did not get any answer. Thus I am asking again, and politely despite my finding very disrespectful to have a legitimate question ignored: who was on the short list to write what is now our code of conduct, when was it initiated and in which conditions ? (yes, there are three parts to the question) If, as it is very likely, the question is ignored again, I will simply have to point to this thread whenever I need in the future to give my opinion on what democracy has become here. Thanks, Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Re: When/by who/how was the code of conduct initiated ?
I created this thread because this question was asked several times, that I am sure everybody saw it, and that it still did not get any answer. Thus I am asking again, and politely despite my finding very disrespectful to have a legitimate question ignored: who was on the short list to write what is now our code of conduct, when was it initiated and in which conditions ? (yes, there are three parts to the question) Please let's have someone knowledgeable answer this. There should be nothing sinister going on. If person X, Y, Z suggested it, great. If, as it is very likely, the question is ignored again, I will simply have to point to this thread whenever I need in the future to give my opinion on what democracy has become here. Open source is not exactly a democracy. Even a fork is not the same. However, ideally it is *transparent*, yes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] When/by who/how was the code of conduct initiated ?
I think that most people are ignoring the question because they don't know the answer. The only person who can say for sure would be Volker, and I don't know why he hasn't responded. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just Volker, not a larger group of people. I don't think there's a large group at work, and I don't think it was meant to be presented to the community as fiat accompli. David On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody, I created this thread because this question was asked several times, that I am sure everybody saw it, and that it still did not get any answer. Thus I am asking again, and politely despite my finding very disrespectful to have a legitimate question ignored: who was on the short list to write what is now our code of conduct, when was it initiated and in which conditions ? (yes, there are three parts to the question) If, as it is very likely, the question is ignored again, I will simply have to point to this thread whenever I need in the future to give my opinion on what democracy has become here. Thanks, Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] When/by who/how was the code of conduct initiated ?
I have to say, I really like the phrase fiat accompl. John On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:14:21 PM UTC-8, David Roe wrote: I think that most people are ignoring the question because they don't know the answer. The only person who can say for sure would be Volker, and I don't know why he hasn't responded. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just Volker, not a larger group of people. I don't think there's a large group at work, and I don't think it was meant to be presented to the community as fiat accompli. David On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Nathann Cohen nathan...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: Hello everybody, I created this thread because this question was asked several times, that I am sure everybody saw it, and that it still did not get any answer. Thus I am asking again, and politely despite my finding very disrespectful to have a legitimate question ignored: who was on the short list to write what is now our code of conduct, when was it initiated and in which conditions ? (yes, there are three parts to the question) If, as it is very likely, the question is ignored again, I will simply have to point to this thread whenever I need in the future to give my opinion on what democracy has become here. Thanks, Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com javascript:. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] When/by who/how was the code of conduct initiated ?
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:33 PM, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote: I have to say, I really like the phrase fiat accompl. Hah. I thought that's how the phrase fait accompli was spelled, but google proves me wrong. I always thought there was a connection to the word fiat David John On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:14:21 PM UTC-8, David Roe wrote: I think that most people are ignoring the question because they don't know the answer. The only person who can say for sure would be Volker, and I don't know why he hasn't responded. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just Volker, not a larger group of people. I don't think there's a large group at work, and I don't think it was meant to be presented to the community as fiat accompli. David On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Nathann Cohen nathan...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody, I created this thread because this question was asked several times, that I am sure everybody saw it, and that it still did not get any answer. Thus I am asking again, and politely despite my finding very disrespectful to have a legitimate question ignored: who was on the short list to write what is now our code of conduct, when was it initiated and in which conditions ? (yes, there are three parts to the question) If, as it is very likely, the question is ignored again, I will simply have to point to this thread whenever I need in the future to give my opinion on what democracy has become here. Thanks, Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] When/by who/how was the code of conduct initiated ?
On 26/11/2014, at 16:43, David Roe roed.m...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:33 PM, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote: I have to say, I really like the phrase fiat accompl. Hah. I thought that's how the phrase fait accompli was spelled, but google proves me wrong. I always thought there was a connection to the word fiat It certainly feels fitting ;) but you are not supposed to mix French and Latin :) François -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
