Sage 8.8.rc0 released

[Volker Braun]

As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html 

2393acebc3 (tag: 8.8.rc0, trac/develop) Updated SageMath version to 8.8.rc0

d53fd952c8 Trac #27942: Upgrade brial to 1.2.5

1e30f76809 Trac #27890: Fix a pickling error for codes

6c3a8bd774 Trac #27924: faster generator for noncrossing partitions

a3a7e83b7d Trac #27530: small change in debugger.py

cf1f934a9f Trac #25351: Ideal operations unsupported over QQbar

0c02b6b7b1 Trac #17908: Sage doesn't grok unsolved integral results from fricas

ece3afee96 Trac #27930: Py3: Fix combinat.set_partition_ordered doctests

12d8480936 Trac #27935: A regression in divisors of function fields

974dd47f6f Trac #27927: some pep details in sage-pkg

790dd07b79 Trac #27922: some cleanup in homology folder

d26c6c1fd6 Trac #27918: some details in subword_complex

b9aee296a8 Trac #27900: removed deprecated dynamics code from schemes

97cbf0ec3b Trac #27850: Fix a bug in gens_two method for ideals of function fields

37a5846af9 Trac #26991: Refactor function field code

cc0c8552af Trac #27931: fix LazyPowerSeriesRing in other variable than x

91fccfa40d Trac #27925: py3: tiny fixes in gap3 interface

ffdd2345c9 Trac #27920: Upgrade pynormaliz to 2.7 to fix installation error when a 'configure' script is accessible in PATH

024eb1916b Trac #27919: some details in Steenrod algebras

c1b606e703 Trac #27912: Add GAP package PackageManager to gap_packages

275dfbfdc0 Trac #27910: Three.js: Save screenshot as PNG

71cecffbaa Trac #27893: Coercion bug with mpz

92300feff5 Trac #27700: fix is_simplicial for non-full-dimensional polytopes

ca4560d077 Trac #27468: Containment check for subgroups broken.

f276d4b633 Trac #27847: openblas 0.3.6

b6c623a069 Trac #27906: correct usage of all([...]) in many places

5372779dd1 Trac #27903: some care for all in matrix2

44c8a4e2f9 Trac #27915: Fix py3_syntax.py doctest on distros

41e4710d58 Trac #27914: py3: hash collisions of Laurent polynomials

b4a1854a77 Trac #27909: py3: fix a doctest in binary_form_reduce

6a4a8c0e71 Trac #27904: py3: fix last doctest in interfaces

d791ed2d39 Trac #27902: 2 more folders in python3-known-passing.txt

54386e7bab Trac #27899: cleanup of Dyck words

dce13c427b Trac #27898: pep cleanup of basic_stats

575bc563d7 Trac #27817: remove SAGE_INSTALL_GCC variable

b6d3c08d3c Trac #27787: py3: matroids.utilities.lift_cross_ratios

23c6588c24 Trac #27673: Fix Polyhedron.volume() in 0-dimensional space

859ebb6a65 Trac #5583: coercion bug in perm groups

777c3a9bd3 Trac #27871: some doc details in projective_curve

fcf0291084 Trac #27894: some pep and pyflakes care in words

167bbc9cb4 Trac #27892: some pep cleanup in elliptic curves over number fields

7a65573f6d Trac #27879: some pep and pyflakes cleanup in torsion_quadratic_module.py

1851edc567 Trac #27877: faster left-right symmetry for unlabelled binary trees

59df72bad0 Trac #27486: Use sdh_cmake for packages that use cmake

c18d869464 Trac #27889: py3 fixes for matroids

4cf85e6e72 Trac #27888: py3 fix for src/sage/all.py

2a506aa1b9 Trac #27887: sorting interval-posets using cubical coordinates

acb869cadd Trac #27885: Py3: symbolic/expression.pyx fix some errors

8481b70fba Trac #27856: Tangent vectors should act as derivations on scalar fields

f6e6ae8d25 Trac #27529: py3: tiny fix in env.py

8fc2040b27 Trac #26552: interface glucose-syrup

716fb69754 (tag: 8.8.beta7) Updated SageMath version to 8.8.beta7

[Daniel Krenn]

Dear release-manager,

On 09.06.19 17:19, Volker Braun wrote:
> As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git
> branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at
> http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html 
>

> [...list of tickets...]

Is there a particular reason why
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27883
(positive_review since 6 days) did not make it into rc0?

I mainly ask because its dependency #22154 was recently merged in a beta
and #27883 makes a change which would need a deprecation if it only goes
into 8.9 (and not 8.8).

Best,

Daniel

[Volker Braun]

On Sunday, June 9, 2019 at 5:41:08 PM UTC+2, Daniel Krenn wrote:

Is there a particular reason why
  https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27883
(positive_review since 6 days) did not make it into rc0?

No particular reason except that I didn't have time this week for anything. I'll merge it for rc1.

[Daniel Krenn]

I see.

> I'll merge it for rc1.

Thanks.

Daniel

[Frédéric Chapoton]

Something missing in the mirrors ?

FileNotMirroredError: tarball does not exist on mirror network
************************************************************************
Error: downloading configure-323.tar.gz failed

[David Coudert]

crash with both python 2 and python 3 on osX. I attach the crash report with python 3.

Any help is more than welcome.

David.

=====

confetti:sage dcoudert$ ./sage

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐

│ SageMath version 8.8.rc0, Release Date: 2019-06-09                 │

│ Using Python 3.7.3. Type "help()" for help.                        │

└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓

┃ Warning: this is a prerelease version, and it may be unstable.     ┃

┗━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┛

**********************************************************************

Oops, Sage crashed. We do our best to make it stable, but...

A crash report was automatically generated with the following information:

  - A verbatim copy of the crash traceback.

  - A copy of your input history during this session.

  - Data on your current Sage configuration.

It was left in the file named:

'/Users/dcoudert/.sage/ipython-5.0.0/Sage_crash_report.txt'

If you can email this file to the developers, the information in it will help

them in understanding and correcting the problem.

You can mail it to: sage-support at sage-s...@googlegroups.com

with the subject 'Sage Crash Report'.

If you want to do it now, the following command will work (under Unix):

mail -s 'Sage Crash Report' sage-s...@googlegroups.com < /Users/dcoudert/.sage/ipython-5.0.0/Sage_crash_report.txt

In your email, please also include information about:

- The operating system under which the crash happened: Linux, macOS, Windows,

  other, and which exact version (for example: Ubuntu 16.04.3, macOS 10.13.2,

  Windows 10 Pro), and whether it is 32-bit or 64-bit;

- How Sage was installed: using pip or conda, from GitHub, as part of

  a Docker container, or other, providing more detail if possible;

- How to reproduce the crash: what exact sequence of instructions can one

  input to get the same crash? Ideally, find a minimal yet complete sequence

  of instructions that yields the crash.

To ensure accurate tracking of this issue, please file a report about it at:

http://trac.sagemath.org

Hit <Enter> to quit (your terminal may close):

c

[Frédéric Chapoton]

Strangely enough, configure-323 is in ticket https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27270 which is not yet closed...

Frederic

[Volker Braun]

On Sunday, June 9, 2019 at 7:08:00 PM UTC+2, Frédéric Chapoton wrote:

Something missing in the mirrors ?

FileNotMirroredError: tarball does not exist on mirror network
************************************************************************
Error: downloading configure-323.tar.gz failed

Thanks, fixed!

[John H Palmieri]

I think the problem is with the openblas upgrade, https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27847.

[John H Palmieri]

On Sunday, June 9, 2019 at 12:37:52 PM UTC-7, John H Palmieri wrote:

I think the problem is with the openblas upgrade, https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27847.

I opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27961 (not that I know how to fix it...)

[François Bissey]

As I suspect in the ticket (in which I also left a comment) the fact
that the version 0.3.5 instead of 0.3.6 is mentioned in the trace make
me think this is an incremental build problem.
Something that should have been rebuilt didn’t and that may be because of
the way you performed the incremental build.

François

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/6cab4410-4a6b-49b9-8346-19e3f0cb3f08%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[John H Palmieri]

I performed the incremental build the way I always do: "git pull trac" followed by "make". When I ran into problems, I restarted from 8.8.beta7, which worked, and then merged #27847, after which I again got a crash.

Building from scratch seems to work; at least Sage builds and runs; now I'm running tests.

  John

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.

[Sébastien Labbé]

Testing the following optional and external packages:

External software detected for doctesting: ffmpeg,graphviz,gurobi,imagemagick,internet,latex,pandoc

Using --optional=4ti2,bliss,cbc,ccache,cmake,cryptominisat,dot2tex,e_antic,external,glucose,latte_int,lidia,lrslib,memlimit,mpir,ninja_build,normaliz,notedown,openssl,pandoc_attributes,pycosat,pynormaliz,python2,qhull,rst2ipynb,sage,topcom
External software to be detected: cplex,ffmpeg,graphviz,gurobi,imagemagick,internet,latex,macaulay2,magma,maple,mathematica,matlab,octave,pandoc,scilab

I get:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

sage -t --long src/sage/databases/findstat.py  # 8 doctests failed
sage -t --long src/sage/combinat/designs/ext_rep.py  # 1 doctest failed
----------------------------------------------------------------------

and only the following is reproducable:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
sage -t --long src/sage/databases/findstat.py  # 8 doctests failed
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Follow up at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/25536

[David Coudert]

working properly after make distclean with py2. Will now do it for py3. 

David.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/29806fdd-9364-469f-8839-d3b8b274362a%40googlegroups.com.

[John H Palmieri]

On Monday, June 10, 2019 at 2:58:27 AM UTC-7, David Coudert wrote:

working properly after make distclean with py2. Will now do it for py3. 

Right, I think that this is an issue with upgrading from the previous version; building from scratch by first doing `make distclean` worked for me, too.

 

David.

[John H Palmieri]

I am having a problem on a different OS X machine (an iMac Pro):

sage -t src/doc/en/thematic_tutorials/explicit_methods_in_number_theory/birds_other.rst
    Bad exit: 1
**********************************************************************
...

sage: dimension(M.cuspidal_subspace()) ## line 109 ##

Fatal: Memory exhausted.
**********************************************************************

I am seeing this with 8.8.beta7 + openblas 0.3.6, built from scratch.

[Kwankyu Lee]

On Monday, June 10, 2019 at 4:40:52 PM UTC+9, Sébastien Labbé wrote:

Testing the following optional and external packages:

External software detected for doctesting: ffmpeg,graphviz,gurobi,imagemagick,internet,latex,pandoc

Using --optional=4ti2,bliss,cbc,ccache,cmake,cryptominisat,dot2tex,e_antic,external,glucose,latte_int,lidia,lrslib,memlimit,mpir,ninja_build,normaliz,notedown,openssl,pandoc_attributes,pycosat,pynormaliz,python2,qhull,rst2ipynb,sage,topcom
External software to be detected: cplex,ffmpeg,graphviz,gurobi,imagemagick,internet,latex,macaulay2,magma,maple,mathematica,matlab,octave,pandoc,scilab

I get:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

sage -t --long src/sage/databases/findstat.py  # 8 doctests failed
sage -t --long src/sage/combinat/designs/ext_rep.py  # 1 doctest failed
----------------------------------------------------------------------

and only the following is reproducible:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
sage -t --long src/sage/databases/findstat.py  # 8 doctests failed
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Follow up at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/25536

I see Sage has been much improved in this respect. Thank you for your persistent efforts! 

[E. Madison Bray]

I don't know why the rush to call this a release candidate when there are clearly still several outstanding problems to be resolved before the next release.

As usual absolutely zero communication of a plan or coordination with the community.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/35dc58d0-763e-4da4-b1c4-e8f981665b49%40googlegroups.com.

[darwin doppelganger]

On my MacBook Pro, Mojave 10.14.4, Xcode 10.2.1, compiling SageMath version 8.8.rc0: "Sage build/upgrade complete!"

[Dima Pasechnik]

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:52 AM E. Madison Bray <erik....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I don't know why the rush to call this a release candidate when there are clearly still several outstanding problems to be resolved before the next release.
>
> As usual absolutely zero communication of a plan or coordination with the community.
>

my ongoing complaint is the lack of progress on the improving the
release procedures to make it easy to change the configure package.
At the moment it is extremely sub-optimal, with endless merge
conflicts resulting solely from the need to have the ticket branch
that changes configure.ac, spkg-configure.m4 files, and its friends,
such as sage/big/sage-env* things coming with its configure "package"
tarball. This leaves tickets of this sort languishing for months, as
it's not really possible to get them in sync with the ongoing release
process (already due to configure tarballs coming with artificial
version numbers, that should not clash etc).

I continue to think that the release process should not require
updates of configure package. Sage seems to unique in its insistence
on the release process depending on the autogenerated dumps...

Dima

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34bCgqGe6UCE2eoDVq%2Bmg%2BW8f3nnRrBKztutSLvT%2BjicdQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[E. Madison Bray]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:45 AM Dima Pasechnik <dim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:52 AM E. Madison Bray <erik....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don't know why the rush to call this a release candidate when there are clearly still several outstanding problems to be resolved before the next release.
> >
> > As usual absolutely zero communication of a plan or coordination with the community.
> >
> my ongoing complaint is the lack of progress on the improving the
> release procedures to make it easy to change the configure package.
> At the moment it is extremely sub-optimal, with endless merge
> conflicts resulting solely from the need to have the ticket branch
> that changes configure.ac, spkg-configure.m4 files, and its friends,
> such as sage/big/sage-env* things coming with its configure "package"
> tarball. This leaves tickets of this sort languishing for months, as
> it's not really possible to get them in sync with the ongoing release
> process (already due to configure tarballs coming with artificial
> version numbers, that should not clash etc).
>
> I continue to think that the release process should not require
> updates of configure package. Sage seems to unique in its insistence
> on the release process depending on the autogenerated dumps...

One very easily solution to this, and I know some people will shudder
(myself included) is to simply include the configure script in the
repository. Yes, it's generated. But there's precedent for this.
Among other projects, CPython includes their configure script in the
repository. This allows developers to get right up-and-running with
./configure without having to fuss with the nuances of different
versions of autotools on different systems. Only developers actually
working on configure issues need to worry about that. It's quite
convenient.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAAWYfq1bWWce%2B-tN7V%2B-E7DGAFOGvu3L7san5WDR-M6p%2B0bA2A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dima Pasechnik]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:05 PM E. Madison Bray <erik....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:45 AM Dima Pasechnik <dim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:52 AM E. Madison Bray <erik....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know why the rush to call this a release candidate when there are clearly still several outstanding problems to be resolved before the next release.
> > >
> > > As usual absolutely zero communication of a plan or coordination with the community.
> > >
> > my ongoing complaint is the lack of progress on the improving the
> > release procedures to make it easy to change the configure package.
> > At the moment it is extremely sub-optimal, with endless merge
> > conflicts resulting solely from the need to have the ticket branch
> > that changes configure.ac, spkg-configure.m4 files, and its friends,
> > such as sage/big/sage-env* things coming with its configure "package"
> > tarball. This leaves tickets of this sort languishing for months, as
> > it's not really possible to get them in sync with the ongoing release
> > process (already due to configure tarballs coming with artificial
> > version numbers, that should not clash etc).
> >
> > I continue to think that the release process should not require
> > updates of configure package. Sage seems to unique in its insistence
> > on the release process depending on the autogenerated dumps...
>
> One very easily solution to this, and I know some people will shudder
> (myself included) is to simply include the configure script in the
> repository. Yes, it's generated. But there's precedent for this.

well, it would make running patchbots easier, but
I don't see how this would help the release management,
as auto-merging would be still be out of the question.

The auto-generated crud is simply unmergable, by and large.

The patchbots are largely an orthogonal issue here.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34YrKuwSpzzdvcZHfbXM53zrZujSHa4kCDOaPpFxF9cJqQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dima Pasechnik]

ticket merging in the release process happens in batches, as Volker explained;
half a dozen tickets are merged into a WIP branch and the result sent
to the buildbots.
The buildbots might not have autotools installed, so they cannot take
a branch without
a ready ./configure etc (i.e. a ready configure tarball, ATM)
The merging of tickets with different configure tarballs, or even
worse, with different ./configure scripts is,
however, hard.

What I don't understand is: why not plug into the process the
post-processing of the merged
WIP branch to actually run ./bootstrap, so that configure tarballs/ or
./configure & co made on the spot,
before the stuff is sent to the buildbots to check.

Where is the catch here, why the latter is not done?

[E. Madison Bray]

That really depends on the change in question. Oftentimes they're
quite discrete. It only becomes a mess when you have to do lots of
AC_REQUIREs and thus things get reordered in the configure script.

That is a problem for us right now since we're doing a lot of
heavy-lifting on configure. Once a lot of that is out of the way it
will calm down a bit. For the most part, when making small tweaks to
a single autoconf macro, the resulting change in the generated
configure script is more-or-less a direct translation.

So for fixing bugs in configure alone it would be useful to keep the
generated script in the repository and not have to mess with this
configure tarball every time.

[Dima Pasechnik]

given the speed things at present move on #27330, it can easily take a
year or two.
And still, as we shift more into using external libraries, there is
going to be more tweaking of
the configure package than in the olden days...

> For the most part, when making small tweaks to
> a single autoconf macro, the resulting change in the generated
> configure script is more-or-less a direct translation.
>
> So for fixing bugs in configure alone it would be useful to keep the
> generated script in the repository and not have to mess with this
> configure tarball every time.
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34b3SLks2hmA_RmF24ikyW3Z9JR-gi3LtnjuAnBurwfecQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[E. Madison Bray]

Absolutely; which is maybe a good reason to just include the configure
script in the repository. True, that would not fix all the merge
issues you're struggling with, but on some level that is almost
unavoidable, at least when testing/building on systems that are not
able to run autoconf smoothly. A more complex workaround involving a
separate build system just for autoconf is probably not worth the
effort compared to that one minor concession.

Meanwhile, keeping it in the repository will make it much easier to
maintain said "tweaks".

I'm not going to fight tooth-and-nail for it, but I'll just emphasize

1) We'd be far from the first project to make this concession
2) It will make enough peoples' lives easier that it's not so bad to
have one generated (plain text) file in the repo

> > For the most part, when making small tweaks to
> > a single autoconf macro, the resulting change in the generated
> > configure script is more-or-less a direct translation.
> >
> > So for fixing bugs in configure alone it would be useful to keep the
> > generated script in the repository and not have to mess with this
> > configure tarball every time.
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release...@googlegroups.com.
> > To post to this group, send email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.
> > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34b3SLks2hmA_RmF24ikyW3Z9JR-gi3LtnjuAnBurwfecQ%40mail.gmail.com.
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAAWYfq2AssVut_34C0d9i85mXkAFnJMiRRv7Q9QCoWKRmDNygg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dima Pasechnik]

as well as all the stuff in config/ and build/make/Makefile-auto.in
so it's more than just one file.

> True, that would not fix all the merge
> issues you're struggling with, but on some level that is almost
> unavoidable, at least when testing/building on systems that are not
> able to run autoconf smoothly. A more complex workaround involving a
> separate build system just for autoconf is probably not worth the
> effort compared to that one minor concession.

it's a not a workaround - the current release process is a huge
bottleneck for #27330
and it is simply buggy, as merging new/updated spkg-configure.m4 files and
stuff in m4/ without updatng configure is error-prone.

Having this in place would simplify things and make them more robust.
If merging into WIP happens on a local box (I don't recall how Volker does it),
and then the result is pushed to bots (or pulled by them)
I really do not see a reason for it not being in place, it's totally
trivial to implement.

If the merging happens on github/lab, it is still not hard to put some
commit hooks/TravisCI calls/whatever into
place to make it happen.

All this can be also made to create a configure tarball and push it somewhere.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34Z7UnoxUd7nKchpHMiT_nSGEB2sqSWKjyjSdKGW4_GtwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Eric Gourgoulhon]

On Ubuntu 18.04 running on bi-Xeon E5-2623 (8 cores) + 16 GB RAM:

- python2:

  - build (-j16) from a fresh git clone + pull develop completed, with Sphinx complaining during the doc build:

     formatargspec() is now deprecated.  Please use sphinx.util.inspect.Signature instead

  - all tests from ptestlong passed

- python3:

  -build (-j16) from a fresh git clone + pull develop completed, with the same Sphinx deprecation warning as with python 2.

  - all tests from ptest-python3 passed

Eric.

[Volker Braun]

On Wednesday, June 12, 2019 at 2:05:04 PM UTC+2, E. Madison Bray wrote:

One very easily solution to this, and I know some people will shudder
(myself included) is to simply include the configure script in the
repository.

We already have a way of bundling up the configure scripts in a tarball, we may just as well use that. Its not used right now becaues a) monotonically increasing version numbers for the confball are a pita, and b) we don't want to put every temporary confball on the mirror network. E.g. if somebody steps up and extends the bootstrap script to save/load based on the git head sha1, e.g.:

    ./bootstrap --save-head

saves upstream/configure-<sha1>.tag.gz

    ./bootstrap  --load-head http://path/to/upstream/

loads http://path/to/upstream/configure-<sha1>.tag.gz

then I can add them to the release script and buildbots...

[Dima Pasechnik]

OK, great, I've opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27978 for this.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-r...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/9e00eb09-b985-4634-90b6-718931463a54%40googlegroups.com.