[sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 10:00:34 AM UTC+2, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > The giac and giacpy packages are now one year optional (#12375). Since > pynac-0.6.6 (#20742) has optional support for giac, and uses it to fix a > bug, > as well as a much faster GCD, I'm proposing to make the giac/giacpy

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-edu] Viewpoint Article in Math Intelligencer on open texts

https://moscow.sci-hub.cc/12ca465033b407001af9d921b2c7f5fa/hefferon2016.pdf -- 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] Re: Trac workflow and needs_review

> > > I think Jeroen *did* automate the posts regarding empty author and/or > reviewer fields when he was release manager. :-) > I'm pretty sure that Volker automates this too... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe

[sage-devel] Viewpoint Article in Math Intelligencer on open texts

The following article cites both Sage and Mathbook XML a fair amount. And is definitely worth the read, persuasive but also realistic about open texts.(One of the authors has written a Sage lab manual for his book.) Rob, probably a link on the MBX site would not be amiss. The

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Trac workflow and needs_review

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, leif wrote: True. It feels extremely stupid to get a message "You forgot reviewer's name.", as this is exactly what computers should do instead of humans. You cannot automatically add these names; all we could do is create some plug-in such that when a ticket is set to

[sage-devel] Re: Trac workflow and needs_review

Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Erik Bray wrote: > >> One thing that will help, which has already been discussed up-thread, >> is having Trac help take care of the little nitty-gritty checks on >> tickets. > > True. It feels extremely stupid to get a message "You forgot reviewer's >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Trac workflow and needs_review

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Erik Bray wrote: One thing that will help, which has already been discussed up-thread, is having Trac help take care of the little nitty-gritty checks on tickets. True. It feels extremely stupid to get a message "You forgot reviewer's name.", as this is exactly what

[sage-devel] Re: Errors in an old, massive patch for Skew Polynomials in Sage

Hey Aprit, The errors (there's numerous instances of each of these errors occurring. > Please find below one of each type): > (1) > sage: R. = QQ[] > sage: sigma = R.hom([t+1]) > sage: S. = R['x', sigma] > sage: S.twist_map(-1) > > > > *Got - TypeError: bad operand type for unary ~: >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ssh fail

It is now working for me! Not sure what happened. Eviatar On Thursday, 30 June 2016 23:34:49 UTC-7, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > perhaps adding an invalid ssh key still breaks the communication between > git server and trac... > Can they still push changes to the git server? > > On Friday, July

Re: [sage-devel] Re: spkgs assumed for doctesting but not default installed

Hi, I just noticed, in the very beginning when doing "make" after distclean, the build process prints a list of packages: checking package versions... 4ti2-1.6.7 alabaster-0.7.8 arb-2.8.1.p0 ... This list *does* contain the uninstalled packages:

Re: [sage-devel] Re: spkgs assumed for doctesting but not default installed

> Except for the Sage library (and probably docbuilding, not sure), yes. > If you explicitly use 'make -j1', then also the Sage library will be > built sequentially, still using Python's multi-processing though, as > does docbuilding. I've done `make distclean && make -j1`. Let's see how that one

[sage-devel] Re: spkgs assumed for doctesting but not default installed

Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: >> $ make --version > GNU Make 4.2.1 > Built for x86_64-pc-linux-gnu > >> Did you build in parallel, and if so, does probably building >> sequentially fix the problem (such that the missing packages then get >> built)? > > I just did "make"; the default is still

Re: [sage-devel] Re: spkgs assumed for doctesting but not default installed

> $ make --version GNU Make 4.2.1 Built for x86_64-pc-linux-gnu > Did you build in parallel, and if so, does probably building > sequentially fix the problem (such that the missing packages then get > built)? I just did "make"; the default is still sequential build, right? I have no suspect

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Trac workflow and needs_review

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:58 PM, William Stein wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Erik Bray wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:14 PM, leif wrote: >>> Erik Bray wrote: While we're tinkering with the workflow, I think we

[sage-devel] Re: spkgs assumed for doctesting but not default installed

Johan S. R. Nielsen wrote: > Hi, > > I've now recompiled Sage after rolling back llvm-libs to 3.7.1-1 (was > 3.8.0.1). That fixed the GLIBCXX errors spewing out of ar and ranlib, > but it didn't fix the problem: my newly compiled version of Sage is > still born without most of the default spkgs,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: spkgs assumed for doctesting but not default installed

Hi, I've now recompiled Sage after rolling back llvm-libs to 3.7.1-1 (was 3.8.0.1). That fixed the GLIBCXX errors spewing out of ar and ranlib, but it didn't fix the problem: my newly compiled version of Sage is still born without most of the default spkgs, including sympy, jmol, palp,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: sage fails to build on (fresh install of) debian linux 8.4 (64 bit)...

Are you having the same problem as me: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-devel/WERLdTKfAho For instance, do you have sympy installed? (if you don't, "./sage -t src/sage/arith.py" will fail immediately due to uninstalled sympy). Do you have Cremona's mini-database installed? Test by

[sage-devel] Re: sage fails to build on (fresh install of) debian linux 8.4 (64 bit)...

Installing on yet another computer today. Same basic deal: everything builds except dochtml. This time I did check the logs before running ./sage -i jmol, and can confirm that no file with a name of the form $SAGE_ROOT/logs/pkgs/jmol-*.log was written on the initial build. On Sunday, June

Re: [sage-devel] Re: trac mails are back on

Weird. I'll look in the Trac log and see if there's any more info on that. "expected string or buffer" is a Python error that occurs when trying to call str() on something that isn't string-like. Probably a bug in Trac (or possibly the account manager plugin). There will probably be a full

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ssh fail

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016, Viviane Pons wrote: I'm with two new sage git users: eviatarbach and avenrias and they seem to have a similar problem. They have put their ssh key on trac (I've checked), but it keeps saying "Permission denied (publickey)" when they try I got the same error. (Not that it

[sage-devel] Re: trac mails are back on

I've updated #18889, and did not get any errors (changed the type from task to enhancement too...) On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 4:48:37 AM UTC+1, Paul Masson wrote: > > Just got this error when saving changes to #18889: > > closeWarning: The change has been saved, but an error occurred while >

[sage-devel] Re: trac mails are back on

Hello, I got the same error yesterday after commenting (and Cc'ing some people) on #20908. I don't know how to replicate this error though... I worked on several tickets yesterday and only got this error with #20908. David Le vendredi 1 juillet 2016 05:48:37 UTC+2, Paul Masson a écrit : > >

[sage-devel] Re: Errors in an old, massive patch for Skew Polynomials in Sage

Hello, Here is the latest branch and the last commit was by David Lucas. https://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/diff?id=32feb35840fab0ebd5a8957aed78d4c05d7e751c The errors (there's numerous instances of each of these errors occurring. Please find below one of each type): (1) sage: R. = QQ[] sage:

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ssh fail

perhaps adding an invalid ssh key still breaks the communication between git server and trac... Can they still push changes to the git server? On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 12:35:55 AM UTC+1, Viviane Pons wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm with two new sage git users: eviatarbach and avenrias and they seem to