Re: [sage-devel] What to do with the "Timed out" failures of patchbots?

It was noted that the issue might be related with that discussed in https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sage-devel/linbox$2064-bit$20charpoly%7Csort:relevance/sage-devel/TLcYb4z7jyI/SsW02-5mBwAJ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel"

[sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

Just to emphasize that there are different ways to work with patches, I am using patchfiles exclusively, always piping the diff into a text file and editing that. It's quite easy, just don't change hunk headers. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [sage-devel] Autogenerated pari files in the source tree and not git-ignored

Hi, These are left over from previous Sage version. They are *not* installed by the cypari2 package. You can safely remove them. Best Vincent On 11/07/2017 12:12, Simon King wrote: Hi! There are two files that are autogenerated by pari: src/sage/libs/cypari2/auto_gen.pxi und

[sage-devel] Question on git merge

Dear all, sorry to ask a (probably stupid) question on git here, but my question arose from trying to do SageMath development. I have a commit xyz with a very small changeset: It modifies a single line in a single file my_file. Being on a different git branch, I tried git cherry-pick xyz

Re: [sage-devel] Question on git merge

On 2017-07-11 14:39, Simon King wrote: > Being on a different git branch, I tried >git cherry-pick xyz Why cherry-pick and not simply git merge xyz ? This could git help finding a proper merge base. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel"

[sage-devel] Autogenerated pari files in the source tree and not git-ignored

Hi! There are two files that are autogenerated by pari: src/sage/libs/cypari2/auto_gen.pxi und src/sage/libs/cypari2/auto_instance.pxi Is it really allowed that installing a package modifies the Sage source tree? If it is allowed: Should such files then not be git-ignored? Is there a ticket for

[sage-devel] Re: Autogenerated pari files in the source tree and not git-ignored

Hi Vincent, On 2017-07-11, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > These are left over from previous Sage version. They are *not* installed > by the cypari2 package. > > You can safely remove them. Thank you! Cheers, Simon -- You received this message because you are

[sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

On 2017-07-11, Simon King wrote: > Being on a different git branch, I tried >git cherry-pick xyz Could a different strategy help? When I did git cherry-pick --strategy=recursive -X theirs xyz I actually got no conflict at all. But there *should* be a conflict

[sage-devel] Re: [ODK participants] Blog post on fast multivariate arithmetic

Hi, On 2017-07-10, mmarco wrote: > It is surprising the difference between singular and Sage, considering that > Sage mostly relies on Singular for multivariate polynomial arithmetic. Note that Singular is optimised for Gröbner basis computations, but certainly not optimised

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Ralf Hemmecke wrote: > If it is only a small difference to just one file on another (diverged) > branch, then why not simply create a patch and apply it to the right branch. > > Something like this. > > git checkout mybranch > git format-patch

[sage-devel] Re: [ODK participants] Blog post on fast multivariate arithmetic

On Tuesday, 11 July 2017 12:20:15 UTC+2, Simon King wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2017-07-10, mmarco wrote: > > It is surprising the difference between singular and Sage, considering > that > > Sage mostly relies on Singular for multivariate polynomial arithmetic. > > Note that

[sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

On 2017-07-11, Daniel Krenn wrote: > On 2017-07-11 14:39, Simon King wrote: >> Being on a different git branch, I tried >>git cherry-pick xyz > > Why cherry-pick and not simply > git merge xyz > ? This could git help finding a proper merge base. Because I didn't want to merge

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

If it is only a small difference to just one file on another (diverged) branch, then why not simply create a patch and apply it to the right branch. Something like this. git checkout mybranch git format-patch -k1 # if it is just on commit # This gives a file 0001-... git checkout master git

[sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

Hi Ralf, On 2017-07-11, Ralf Hemmecke wrote: > If it is only a small difference to just one file on another (diverged) > branch, then why not simply create a patch and apply it to the right branch. That's what I eventually did. However, I think it would be good to know

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

Hi, perhaps not intellectually satisfying, but if the change to cherry-pick is only one line, perhaps just rewriting the line by hand is the simplest way. Ciao, Thierry On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 04:13:03PM +, Simon King wrote: > Hi Erik, > > On 2017-07-11, Erik Bray

[sage-devel] Re: Question on git merge

Hi Erik, On 2017-07-11, Erik Bray wrote: > cherry-pick basically does exactly that. If a patch doesn't apply > with cherry-pick it will give you the opportunity to resolve the merge > conflict manually, which you'll probably have to do no matter what in > most cases.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [ODK participants] Blog post on fast multivariate arithmetic

> That's absolutely correct, and a point I make in my blog. One heuristic is > that GBs tend to have a large number of very small polynomials and so one > can dispatch larger arithmetic operations to a different back end safely > (converting to and from some other format on the fly). This is

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [ODK participants] Blog post on fast multivariate arithmetic

On Tuesday, 11 July 2017 20:26:51 UTC+2, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > > > That's absolutely correct, and a point I make in my blog. One heuristic > is > > that GBs tend to have a large number of very small polynomials and so > one > > can dispatch larger arithmetic operations to a