Re: [sage-devel] Urgent: Please vote on these "disputed" PRs
I think I will quit the Sage project as soon as decisions on technical merits of PRs and issues will start to be taken in a nakedly political way. I am very strongly against any political overtones in these matters - it reminds me all too well what's wrong is in academia in general. Dima On 9 April 2024 11:21:46 CEST, Kwankyu Lee wrote: >Hi, > >Reviewing a PR is a technical work, but voting on a disputed PR has a >political element. So I want to make a political remark concerning most of >the disputed PRs. > >The modularization project (making pip-installation packages that contain >portions of the sage library) started years ago with a general consensus of >the sage community. Matthias led the project and did most of hard works. >Many others did not care much about the project and still do not feel the >impact except when encountered with the (annoying) "# needs ..." tags. > >Matthias is also managing much of the sage build system and the CI (mostly >testing infrastructure) on github, partly to support the modularization >project. Many of us would appreciate that. > >Certainly Matthias is not an appointed dictator ruling the developers, but >I think we should at least acknowledge the leading role of him in the area >of his expertise. On technical discussions on PRs, we should give more >weight on his opinions from his expertise. > >I hope that you decide your vote by weighing the conflicting arguments on >the issues. > >Kwankyu > >-- >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 view this discussion on the web visit >https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/3b6b30f7-efea-4812-b5b7-0e1f5894f975n%40googlegroups.com. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/01429D75-1154-433D-AC95-8B336A9FD754%40gmail.com.
[sage-devel] Re: Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
On Tuesday, April 9, 2024 at 3:36:32 PM UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote: 1. The directories *.ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows*. These are special directories that control the GitHub workflows that run for example on pull requests and when release tags are pushed. 2. The files *tox.ini* and *build/bin/write-dockerfile.sh*. They contain the infrastructure for portability testing of the Sage distribution ( https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/portability_testing.html). *build/bin/write-dockerfile.sh* could be moved into *.ci* Yes, that's a plausible change. (But it might also be moved along with the top-level *tox.ini* as part of making sage-bootstrap a pip-installable package; https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/31662) -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/9d6e0c50-577c-4e7d-a99e-a8a4e9ee78ben%40googlegroups.com.
[sage-devel] Re: Github workflows stopped working due to accidental "crazy" commit
Thanks! -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/489c929b-57ff-46d1-8bea-fad5c639bb33n%40googlegroups.com.
[sage-devel] Re: help menu in jupyter notebook
On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 1:30:21 AM UTC+9 Denis wrote: At some point the help menu in jupyter notebooks started pointing to doc.sagemath.org instead of the locally built documentation. I wouldn't mind having a configuration option not to build the documentation, in which case, of course, this would be expected. However, because the documentation is still built by default, it looks more like a bug than a feature. Any thoughts? That was done because jupyterlab help menu does not support loading local documentation. See https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36246 Any idea to improve the situation? -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/9807237b-0508-4e06-9bf2-47f018a2d9a0n%40googlegroups.com.
[sage-devel] Re: Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
1. The directories *.ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows*. These are special directories that control the GitHub workflows that run for example on pull requests and when release tags are pushed. 2. The files *tox.ini* and *build/bin/write-dockerfile.sh*. They contain the infrastructure for portability testing of the Sage distribution ( https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/portability_testing.html). *build/bin/write-dockerfile.sh* could be moved into *.ci* -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/9d23b720-8f2d-41ac-bbcd-62ad2f38c8bcn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
On Tuesday, April 9, 2024 at 3:28:27 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: How about moving them out of the main Sage tree into separate repos, which can be accessed from the main tree as git submodules? That does not work. .github/workflows orchestrates what runs in the repo -- so it has to be in the repo. .devcontainer declares what is offered for the repo in GitHub -- so it has to be in the repo. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/d0628442-129c-4f7a-a71b-6b3a874dc7b8n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
Oops. Experimenting with this idea, I accidentally pushed a "crazy" commit to "develop". Please revoke the commit ASAP! I *mv*ed ".github" directory to "github" and made a symlink ".github -> github" to see if this works, in my own repo. But I accidentally pushed to sagemath/sage! I tried to revoke the commit myself, but failed because "develop" is a protected branch. I don't know how I could push to the sacred branch in the first place. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/1f2c744e-ae75-4787-b87b-4a2015e8777bn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
On 10 April 2024 00:51:33 CEST, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >On Tuesday, April 9, 2024 at 3:28:27 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >How about moving them out of the main Sage tree into separate repos, which >can be accessed from the main tree as git submodules? > > >That does not work. >.github/workflows orchestrates what runs in the repo -- so it has to be in >the repo. >.devcontainer declares what is offered for the repo in GitHub -- so it has >to be in the repo. Then the other way around - have a CI/sage-distro repo (which can very well have relaxed policies) with all that .github/ etc stuff needed for CI, including a part of build/ - and checkout sagelib as a submodule. The orchestration between the two repos looks doable. > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/E50C6018-FE63-4F0F-8938-231E7A492A91%40gmail.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
On Tuesday, April 9, 2024 at 4:20:56 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: have a CI/sage-distro repo [...] with all that .github/ etc stuff needed for CI, including a part of build/ - and checkout sagelib as a submodule. Also that does not work. Part of the .github/workflows is to run the CI on the pull requests for the Sage library, and the .devcontainer is for making GitHub Codespaces available on the pull requests for the Sage library. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/604274c5-e7ac-41ef-a2b4-8bef436a91a8n%40googlegroups.com.
[sage-devel] Proposal (redo): Make python_build (and its dependency pyproject_hooks) a standard package
We added python_build as an optional "pip" package (see https://deploy-livedoc--sagemath.netlify.app/html/en/developer/packaging#package-types for the terminology), - https://deploy-livedoc--sagemath.netlify.app/html/en/reference/spkg/python_build#spkg-python-build (added in 2022). "python_build" (a.k.a. pypa/build) is the current standard front-end for making source distributions and wheels from a Python source tree. It has replaced the deprecated practices of calling "setup.py sdist" or "setup.py bdist_wheel" directly. We already use it for building the modularized distribution packages. Making it a standard package will allow us to modernize the build infrastructure (front-end) for the Sage library in the Sage distribution. I'm proposing to make it a standard package according to the procedures in our developer guide. Per our policy, that's a "normal" package, so its dependency pyproject_hooks will also be added. The PR is prepared in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37300 This is a re-do of my proposal https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/MIU-xo9b7pc/m/NsyUa7iXAgAJ whose discussion was stalled by commenters bundling it with political demands. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/e6b74134-7ed7-4da4-8b41-bebeef5c1f15n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 7:51:34 AM UTC+9 Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Tuesday, April 9, 2024 at 3:28:27 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: How about moving them out of the main Sage tree into separate repos, which can be accessed from the main tree as git submodules? That does not work. .github/workflows orchestrates what runs in the repo -- so it has to be in the repo. .devcontainer declares what is offered for the repo in GitHub -- so it has to be in the repo. Oops. Experimenting with this idea, I accidentally pushed a "crazy" commit to "develop". Please revoke the commit ASAP! -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/6a9b8218-78d4-4fb1-9c8a-c22e6b6a2655n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
How about redefining the meaning of "CI Fix" label: 1. We designate a person to be the CI manager. 2. For PRs pertaining to the designated directories and files, we add "CI Fix" label 3. The CI manager has the right to merge PRs with "CI Fix" label to develop. 4. The old meaning of "CI Fix" label as "immediate fixes" is dropped. 5. Hot fix PRs for breakage of CI also gets "CI Fix" label. ? -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/a6786dd0-1d85-4b06-99ca-75697172d71en%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
On 9 April 2024 23:11:59 CEST, Matthias Koeppe wrote: >Dear Sage developers: >I propose to consider the following governance change for a small part of >the Sage repository: >1. The directories *.ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows*. These are >special directories that control the GitHub workflows that run for example >on pull requests and when release tags are pushed. >2. The files *tox.ini* and *build/bin/write-dockerfile.sh*. They contain >the infrastructure for portability testing of the Sage distribution >(https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/portability_testing.html). > >Some of these files are shipped as part of the Sage distribution, but none >of them have any role in the build process or runtime of Sage, and thus >none of them are tested by the Release Manager. > >*Status quo: *All changes to these files go through the normal review >process for Sage PRs; when set to "positive review", Volker merges them >into the next development release. >In the terminology of https://martinfowler.com/articles/ship-show-ask.html >(ht Gonzalo Tornaria), this is the "Ask" model. > >Acknowledgment: I'm grateful to all who have contributed to the review of >my PRs that made changes to these files in the past: thanks for your time >and energy. > >*Proposed change: *All changes to these files are made through PRs. When >the PR is ready, a developer in the Maintainer role directly merges the PR >into the "develop" branch. >In other words, switch to the "Show" model for these changes. How about moving them out of the main Sage tree into separate repos, which can be accessed from the main tree as git submodules? Then they could be developed in a completely separate process, and the corresponding PRs and issues won't be clogging up the main repo (which is already overloaded with all sorts of tangentially relevant to sagelib things.) And the governance of these parts will be a separate thing all together. Dima > >*Why the change:* >1. Changes to these files do not have any effect on the build and runtime >of Sage; >- thus changes to these files do not risk breaking the mathematical >correctness, or the performance of anything in Sage; >- hence there may not be the same need for formal review compared to >changes to the Sage library. > >2. Our project has a collective interest in smoothly operating development >infrastructure / quality assurance tools; >- but tragedy of the commons; >- more specifically, developing/improving such development tools only pays >off individually for developers with a sufficiently high volume of activity >(cf. >https://github.com/sagemath/sage/graphs/contributors?from=2020-01-01=2024-04-09=c); >- there may also be a technical barrier that prevents developers from even >reviewing a PR that makes changes to these files; >- hence, waiting for reviewers to approve a PR and waiting for the Release >Manager to merge it adds too much delay and friction. > >3. Examples (all PRs authored by me, waiting for review): >- "CI build, doc-build: Run containers explicitly, separate jobs for >pyright, build, modularized tests, long tests" >(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36498) waiting for review since Oct >21, 2023 >- "GH Actions: Build platform-independent wheels of sagemath-environment, >sage-setup, sage-sws2rst for PyPI" >(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37099) waiting for review since Feb 5 >- "CI: Update Linux platforms / runners" waiting for review since Feb 14 >- "GH Actions: Build macOS arm64 wheels" >(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37503) waiting for review since Feb >28 >- "CI Build: Fix "test modularized distributions" >(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37750) waiting for review since Apr 4 >- "dist.yml: Download optional/experimental tarballs for GitHub Release >assets" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37762) waiting for review >since Apr 6 > >4. Non-examples (all PRs authored by me, waiting for review): >- "CI Build: Show segfaults using GitHub annotations" >(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37738, waiting for review) -- this >makes changes in sage.doctest, so would continue to be reviewed normally >- "tox.ini: Add environments ruff, ruff-minimal; GH Actions: run >ruff-minimal" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37453, waiting for >review) -- this also makes changes in src/tox.ini and src/doc, so would >continue to be reviewed normally >- "src/tox.ini (coverage:run): Set concurrency = multiprocessing,threads" >(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37010) -- makes changes in >src/tox.ini, so would continue to be reviewed normally >- "sage -tox -e pyright: Update, speed up, isolate" >(https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36515) -- makes changes to >pyrightconfig.json and src/tox.ini, so would continue to be reviewed >normally > > -- 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,
[sage-devel] Github workflows stopped working due to accidental "crazy" commit
Because of https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/dEa3i2Fn3ZY/m/gIWG6UpBAAAJ currently github workflows stopped working. Please revoke the commit ASAP! Sorry for inconveniences! -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/6a9427a1-4ee4-41ca-ac7a-50661e21ca8dn%40googlegroups.com.
[sage-devel] Re: Github workflows stopped working due to accidental "crazy" commit
I've force-pushed the original tip of the branch. On Tuesday, April 9, 2024 at 5:03:50 PM UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote: > Because of > > https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/dEa3i2Fn3ZY/m/gIWG6UpBAAAJ > > currently github workflows stopped working. > > Please revoke the commit ASAP! > > Sorry for inconveniences! > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/178fcbad-0428-4f90-9099-a680ee8aae90n%40googlegroups.com.
[sage-devel] Governance proposal: Maintainer/code-owner model for .ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows, tox.ini
Dear Sage developers: I propose to consider the following governance change for a small part of the Sage repository: 1. The directories *.ci, .devcontainer, .github/workflows*. These are special directories that control the GitHub workflows that run for example on pull requests and when release tags are pushed. 2. The files *tox.ini* and *build/bin/write-dockerfile.sh*. They contain the infrastructure for portability testing of the Sage distribution (https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/portability_testing.html). Some of these files are shipped as part of the Sage distribution, but none of them have any role in the build process or runtime of Sage, and thus none of them are tested by the Release Manager. *Status quo: *All changes to these files go through the normal review process for Sage PRs; when set to "positive review", Volker merges them into the next development release. In the terminology of https://martinfowler.com/articles/ship-show-ask.html (ht Gonzalo Tornaria), this is the "Ask" model. Acknowledgment: I'm grateful to all who have contributed to the review of my PRs that made changes to these files in the past: thanks for your time and energy. *Proposed change: *All changes to these files are made through PRs. When the PR is ready, a developer in the Maintainer role directly merges the PR into the "develop" branch. In other words, switch to the "Show" model for these changes. *Why the change:* 1. Changes to these files do not have any effect on the build and runtime of Sage; - thus changes to these files do not risk breaking the mathematical correctness, or the performance of anything in Sage; - hence there may not be the same need for formal review compared to changes to the Sage library. 2. Our project has a collective interest in smoothly operating development infrastructure / quality assurance tools; - but tragedy of the commons; - more specifically, developing/improving such development tools only pays off individually for developers with a sufficiently high volume of activity (cf. https://github.com/sagemath/sage/graphs/contributors?from=2020-01-01=2024-04-09=c); - there may also be a technical barrier that prevents developers from even reviewing a PR that makes changes to these files; - hence, waiting for reviewers to approve a PR and waiting for the Release Manager to merge it adds too much delay and friction. 3. Examples (all PRs authored by me, waiting for review): - "CI build, doc-build: Run containers explicitly, separate jobs for pyright, build, modularized tests, long tests" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36498) waiting for review since Oct 21, 2023 - "GH Actions: Build platform-independent wheels of sagemath-environment, sage-setup, sage-sws2rst for PyPI" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37099) waiting for review since Feb 5 - "CI: Update Linux platforms / runners" waiting for review since Feb 14 - "GH Actions: Build macOS arm64 wheels" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37503) waiting for review since Feb 28 - "CI Build: Fix "test modularized distributions" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37750) waiting for review since Apr 4 - "dist.yml: Download optional/experimental tarballs for GitHub Release assets" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37762) waiting for review since Apr 6 4. Non-examples (all PRs authored by me, waiting for review): - "CI Build: Show segfaults using GitHub annotations" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37738, waiting for review) -- this makes changes in sage.doctest, so would continue to be reviewed normally - "tox.ini: Add environments ruff, ruff-minimal; GH Actions: run ruff-minimal" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37453, waiting for review) -- this also makes changes in src/tox.ini and src/doc, so would continue to be reviewed normally - "src/tox.ini (coverage:run): Set concurrency = multiprocessing,threads" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37010) -- makes changes in src/tox.ini, so would continue to be reviewed normally - "sage -tox -e pyright: Update, speed up, isolate" (https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36515) -- makes changes to pyrightconfig.json and src/tox.ini, so would continue to be reviewed normally -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/d4a6462d-42ab-4afc-b24e-0be98be20174n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-devel] Urgent: Please vote on these "disputed" PRs
Hi, Reviewing a PR is a technical work, but voting on a disputed PR has a political element. So I want to make a political remark concerning most of the disputed PRs. The modularization project (making pip-installation packages that contain portions of the sage library) started years ago with a general consensus of the sage community. Matthias led the project and did most of hard works. Many others did not care much about the project and still do not feel the impact except when encountered with the (annoying) "# needs ..." tags. Matthias is also managing much of the sage build system and the CI (mostly testing infrastructure) on github, partly to support the modularization project. Many of us would appreciate that. Certainly Matthias is not an appointed dictator ruling the developers, but I think we should at least acknowledge the leading role of him in the area of his expertise. On technical discussions on PRs, we should give more weight on his opinions from his expertise. I hope that you decide your vote by weighing the conflicting arguments on the issues. Kwankyu -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/3b6b30f7-efea-4812-b5b7-0e1f5894f975n%40googlegroups.com.
[sage-devel] help menu in jupyter notebook
At some point the help menu in jupyter notebooks started pointing to doc.sagemath.org instead of the locally built documentation. I wouldn't mind having a configuration option not to build the documentation, in which case, of course, this would be expected. However, because the documentation is still built by default, it looks more like a bug than a feature. Any thoughts? Denis -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/34d436c6-b74d-4726-b9e4-47c8e3f840ben%40googlegroups.com.
