On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Aaron Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Friday, June 14, 2013, Aaron Meurer wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Matthew Rocklin <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > SciPy is a bit over a week away.  I'd like to resurrect this thread.
>> > Here
>> > are some ideas for sprints that would interest me or that have come up
>> > recently
>> >
>> > Assumptions
>> > Managing auto-evaluation
>> > Generic, non-expr Add/Mul container classes
>> > Solve?
>> > Breaking apart giant methods (e.g. Mul.flatten) into more smaller
>> > methods
>> > (e.g. _eval_rewrite_foo)  (I think that this idea scales well for a
>> > sprint)
>> > Step-by-step evaluation (I think this is feasible once we have the
>> > above,
>> > possibly requiring some meta-programming magic)
>> > I'd also love to chat about rewrite rules and patterns - that might just
>> > be
>> > my own passion though :-)
>> > Release 7.3 (should this happen before GSoC gets into full swing?)
>>
>> My preferences are (in order)
>>
>> Releasing 0.7.3
>> Assumptions
>> Auto-evaluation
>> Solve
>>
>> And seeing as the last three are pretty hard, we may just want to
>> focus on releasing.  That is easy. We just need to merge pull
>> requests, iron out bugs, and, most importantly, work on automating the
>> process. Even people who have never contributed to SymPy before could
>> help out with things like writing the release notes.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Aaron, you seem to have an encyclopedic recall of the issue tracker.
>> > What
>> > have been the commonly recurring issues over the years?  Can you make a
>> > list
>> > for us to look over?
>>
>> Hmm, I'm not sure. My encyclopedic knowledge is optimized for
>> remembering specific issues. I can't remember general trends. I know
>> of a few, but they are mainly the ones that are interesting to me
>> (like issues with integrate()).
>>
>> >
>> > Also, there is the possibility of having a low-latency high-level
>> > meeting
>> > about some issues.  Not a sprint, more of the opposite.  Here are some
>> > vague
>> > thoughts
>> >
>> > Money: How should we use our money?   Should we get more money?  Apply
>> > for a
>> > grant?  What would we do if we got it?
>> > Direction:  Does anyone have any big ideas about how SymPy should evolve
>> > in
>> > the future?  Lets write a new roadmap.
>> > Publications:  I could work on SymPy a lot more if I could justify it
>> > from
>> > an academic point of view.  I think many of us are in similar positions.
>> > How can the community support this?
>> > What's the plan for SymPy Live? (I notice that David Li will be
>> > attending)
>>
>> There will be plenty of opportunities to talk throughout the
>> conference. There are also BoFs. We can see about organizing a SymPy
>> one.  I agree about talking about all these things. I've CCd Andy
>> Terrel, who is a long time SymPy community member and also a chair of
>> the conference.
>
>
> One of the conference organizers sent me this:
>
> "The suggested format for the BoFs this year is to have a moderator and some
> panelists to provide some structure for discussion.  The panel is of course
> not required but for larger groups can help to lead to a more productive
> conversation.
>
> "Since you would be the one suggesting the BoF you really have control over
> who you want to put on the panel.  As I assume that you are going to suggest
> a SymPy BoF it might be a good idea to find someone else who could moderate
> and put yourself and maybe two others who are main SymPy developers on the
> panel and have the moderator come up with some canned questions to get the
> ball rolling."
>
> Any thoughts?

I guess we'd see how many people are interested, and if it is a lot,
we can create the panel.
I'll be happy to moderate or sit on the panel if needed. Otherwise we
can make it less formal.

Ondrej

>
> Aaron Meurer
>
>>
>> By the way, on a slightly related topic, if anyone wants to help out
>> or give feedback on the tutorial Ondrej and I will be giving at SciPy,
>> just ping me. I will be working on it all weekend.  We're still
>> fleshing out some details (like how we plan to actually present the
>> material), so feedback is welcome.
>>
>> Aaron Meurer
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 5:58 AM, Mary Clark <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> If I have time at the end of my project, I will try to do so!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sunday, 2 June 2013 02:08:27 UTC+1, Aaron Meurer wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I agree we should do this, though I'm not sure if the sprints are the
>> >>> best place for it since few of us who will be there are familiar with
>> >>> that part of the code. How much work is there to do?  Maybe you could
>> >>> incorporate it into your GSoC project.
>> >>>
>> >>> Aaron Meurer
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 3:10 PM, David Joyner <[email protected]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Mary Clark <[email protected]>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >> What about reorganising the combinatorics module so that group
>> >>> >> theory
>> >>> >> has
>> >>> >> its own space?  It doesn't belong in combinatorics, really.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I like this idea. In fact, I think It was already suggested by Aaron
>> >>> > but maybe
>> >>> > I misunderstood him.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Saturday, 1 June 2013 15:38:45 UTC+1, Stefan Krastanov wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> I am somewhat hesitant to suggest anything without actually being
>> >>> >>> there to
>> >>> >>> help, but maybe redoing the return values from `solve` could be an
>> >>> >>> appropriate task.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On 30 May 2013 22:12, Aaron Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> There are going to be several of us at SciPy 2013, and we plan on
>> >>> >>>> having a sprint for SymPy. Any suggestions on what you would like
>> >>> >>>> to
>> >>> >>>> see the sprint be about?
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Aaron Meurer
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> --
>> >>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>> >>> >>>> Google
>> >>> >>>> Groups
>> >>> >>>> "sympy" group.
>> >>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>> >>> >>>> send an
>> >>> >>>> email to [email protected].
>> >>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Visit this group at
>> >>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en-US.
>> >>> >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> >>> >> Groups
>> >>> >> "sympy" group.
>> >>> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>> >>> >> send
>> >>> >> an
>> >>> >> email to [email protected].
>> >>> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> >>> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en-US.
>> >>> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>> >>> >>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sympy" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
>
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to