On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 23:25:12 UTC+2 Nils Bruin wrote:
It looks to me proposal 1 still doesn't make it *mandatory* to drop support
outside of the NEP29-defined version window. It seems to me that it just
defines when a support-drop PR becomes acceptable to merge, and that such a
PR would
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 6:01:02 PM UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote:
Proposal 2 simply describes the current practice. PR author proposes and
builds the case for the change, and a normal discussion take place on the
PR.
I want to see, in the wiki page, a summary of what are (or should be)
Proposal 2 simply describes the current practice. PR author proposes and
builds the case for the change, and a normal discussion take place on the
PR.
I want to see, in the wiki page, a summary of what are (or should be)
considered to "build the case", which could be used as an agenda for a
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 4:51:57 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 14:55:35 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
I don't think so; I think there is an effective difference of about 6–9
months.
Just O(1), of course, but so are the release cadences of OS distributions
and major
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 14:55:35 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
I don't think so; I think there is an effective difference of about 6–9
months.
Just O(1), of course, but so are the release cadences of OS distributions
and major packages.
In NEP 29 I see a 42 month window; in Proposal 2 I
I'm done with editing for today. There are still a number of major "TBD"s
there; others are welcome to help with these.
Matthias
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 10:19:15 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> Thanks Tobias for creating this wiki page.
>
> I will edit it today so it presents more than
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 2:25:12 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 09:36:25 UTC-7 Tobias Diez wrote:
Thanks David for your suggestions!
I've now created a wiki page at
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/NEP-29:-Python-version-strategy that
on the one hand
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 09:36:25 UTC-7 Tobias Diez wrote:
Thanks David for your suggestions!
I've now created a wiki page at
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/NEP-29:-Python-version-strategy that
on the one hand clarifies a few questions that were raised before and on
the other hand
Thanks Tobias for creating this wiki page.
I will edit it today so it presents more than 1 proposal on equal footing.
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 9:36:25 AM UTC-7 Tobias Diez wrote:
> Thanks David for your suggestions!
>
> I've now created a wiki page at
>
Thanks David for your suggestions!
I've now created a wiki page at
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/NEP-29:-Python-version-strategy that
on the one hand clarifies a few questions that were raised before and on
the other hand summarizes the discussion we had so far. I tried to add all
Thanks for restarting the discussion Tobias. From my perspective, there
are several things that can move this conversation forward.
1. More clarity on how NEP-29 will be implemented in Sage. In particular,
that policy just guarantees a particular time frame during which Python
*will* be
Any suggestions on how to move forward now? Should I simply open a new vote
or are there still open questions or a need to discuss certain aspects of
the proposal?
On Sunday, 4 June 2023 at 19:49:23 UTC+2 G. M.-S. wrote:
>
> For the benefit of all of us (including Dima, Matthias and Tobias),
For the benefit of all of us (including Dima, Matthias and Tobias), would
it be possible to start afresh, without any reference whatsoever to these 3
linked discussions?
Also, would it be possible for David to act somehow as a "moderator"?
Best,
Guillermo
On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 17:37, Tobias
On Saturday, 3 June 2023 at 19:31:18 UTC+8 Marc Culler wrote:
That is what always happens when people try to force a vote before there
has been a discussion of sufficient depth to allow a consensus to form.
To clarify since this point came up before: The discussion about this topic
started
On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 9:17:17 AM UTC-5 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
Well, have you notiiced that while casting his vote, Matthias wrote a
full screenful of questionable explanations of why he voted "no",
That is what always happens when people try to force a vote before there
has been a
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 7:33 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 11:00:58 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 6:23 PM Matthias Koeppe
> wrote:
> > As service for those who are missing the references: [...]
> >
> > - 5-year plan (appeared in
> >
On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 11:00:58 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 6:23 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
> As service for those who are missing the references: [...]
>
> - 5-year plan (appeared in
https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/sVeu16vaEqo/m/D4pewORzAQAJ and
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 6:23 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>
> As service for those who are missing the references:
>
> - BFDL = Benevolent Dictator for Life, which was used as the humorous title
> expressing the Python's community's trust in Guido van Rossum's leadership in
> Python development.
As service for those who are missing the references:
- BFDL = Benevolent Dictator for Life, which was used as the humorous title
expressing the Python's community's trust in Guido van Rossum's leadership
in Python development. Dima's use of the phrase "(not so B)FDL" insinuates
that my work on
Besides, the 2nd option is just some ad hoc hogwash. Or do you propose to
vote on appointing Matthias a (not so B)DFL ?
No. I suggest him to formulate the practice as an objective checklist, so
that voters know that rejecting the 1st option would not mean appointing
DFL.
--
You received
On Wed, 31 May 2023, 08:12 Kwankyu Lee, wrote:
> I think the voting should be about the policy about when to drop old
> python from sage support. There should be two candidates
>
> Candidate T: Tobias' proposal to adopt NEP 29. Tobias may summarize the
> content of NEP 29.
> Candidate M:
I think the voting should be about the policy about when to drop old python
from sage support. There should be two candidates
Candidate T: Tobias' proposal to adopt NEP 29. Tobias may summarize the
content of NEP 29.
Candidate M: Matthias' current practice. But this practice should be
On Wednesday, 31 May 2023 at 03:00:53 UTC+8 Nils Bruin wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 11:13:27 UTC-7 tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
that we normally drop support for older versions right after this support
window (i.e. also adapt the drop schedule
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 8:19 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 12:00:53 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 11:13:27 UTC-7 tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
>
> that we normally drop support for older versions right after this support
> window (i.e. also adapt
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 8:01 PM Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 11:13:27 UTC-7 tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
>
> that we normally drop support for older versions right after this support
> window (i.e. also adapt the drop schedule
>
On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 12:00:53 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 11:13:27 UTC-7 tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
that we normally drop support for older versions right after this support
window (i.e. also adapt the drop schedule
"proponents of a radical step",
Removing support for the oldest Python3 version Sage supports IS NOT A
RADICAL STEP.
Stop this bs please.
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 8:06 PM Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 8:01 PM Matthias Koeppe
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 8:01 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 10:40:36 AM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> (I doubt anyone is advocating to actively break support for python versions
> outside of the NEP 29 support window. Breakage will happen as-needed)
>
>
> Actually this
On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 10:40:36 AM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
(I doubt anyone is advocating to actively break support for python versions
outside of the NEP 29 support window. Breakage will happen as-needed)
Actually this is exactly what Tobias's
PR
On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 11:13:27 UTC-7 tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
that we normally drop support for older versions right after this support
window (i.e. also adapt the drop schedule
https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0029-deprecation_policy.html#drop-schedule).
I've formulated an improved formulation
On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 1:20:51 AM UTC+8 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
But the proposed vote (Tobias's PR
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35403/files) proposes to write a
strict, prescriptive interpretation into the project''s policies.
The policy should serve as a guideline for "normal
Sorry for the confusion. I forgot that there are different readings of
NEP29 and that this lead to misunderstandings before. The proposed policy
is that all python versions supported by NEP29 are also supported by sage
(this is the lower bound) and that we normally drop support for older
On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 12:01:04 AM UTC+8 Nils Bruin wrote:
I'd say the process for NEP 29 has now become so muddled that it's better
to start clean: Set a week (is that enough? do we need more?) for
discussion, then open a thread collecting votes *ONLY* (no comments) for
another week,
Can we please clearly formulate what the motion is that is being discussed
and voted on? As Volker pointed out, NEP 29 guarantees what versions are
supported, i.e., it gives a lower bound to what we support. If we are
adopting that, it would seem that we are trying to solve a problem that
sage
On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 2:26:02 AM UTC-7 David Joyner wrote:
I vote for following NEP 29, or, at the very least, staying as coordinated
with numpy as possible.
Note that our current practice does already coordinate with numpy/scipy:
The developers who engage in the maintenance of the
On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 07:17:17 UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
While in my "ballot" I added a couple of sentenses, they were meant to
rectify the original
post requesting the vote.
I think it's clear that the vote was called prematurely -- there was
clearly a need for people on the forum
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 2:39 PM William Stein wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 2:15 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> >
> > So far we only had very few votes cast.
>
> You might want to consider structuring the voting process more.
Well, have you notiiced that while casting his vote, Matthias wrote
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 2:15 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> So far we only had very few votes cast.
You might want to consider structuring the voting process more. For
example, David Roe did a great job with this for the "move sage to
github"
vote, including a clear deadline, a thread where no
On Tue, 2023-05-30 at 10:15 +0100, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> So far we only had very few votes cast.
>
We probably should have started with the discussion and then voted
afterwards. FWIW I'm still not sure.
I basically agree with Matthias's points. If (for example) supporting
python-3.8 costs us
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 5:15 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> So far we only had very few votes cast.
>
>
I vote for following NEP 29, or, at the very least, staying as coordinated
with numpy as possible.
> Once again, I think we should close ranks with the rest of scientific
> python people and
40 matches
Mail list logo
