Sage 4.0 plan
William Stein
This is the plan for getting Sage-4.0 out. Help in any way you can.
Wed May 6: * mhansen (by 2am) -- patches/todo list so anybody can help.
* robertwb will have reviewed david roe's
* mabshoff provides bill with symmetrica bug testcase
* mabshoff fix libtool issue for pynac
Thu May 7: sage-4.0.alpha0.tar -- ecl; mop up positive review; freebsd
burcin updated pynac
(this will better test ecl)
* wstein, robertwb, nick, mhansen --
help with pynac/symbolics doctest
Fri May 8: sage-4.0.alpha1.tar -- mhansen's symbolics
get in david roe's patch
Sat May 9: Sage-4.0 day -- IRC /merge/referee:
goal: coverage to 75.0%.
E.g.,
* wstein or cwitty -- referee implicit plot 3d
Sun May 10: sage-4.0.rc0.tar (feature freeze)
* fix singular prompt issue (solaris fix)
* fix other singular remaining issues.
Mon May 11: fix fallout; malb fix os x libsingular (?)
Tue May 12: sage-4.0.rc1.tar
Wed May 13:
Thu May 14: sage-4.0.final.tar
Fri May 15: Release sage-4.0.tar.
--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
mabshoff
On May 6, 5:53 pm, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the plan for getting Sage-4.0 out. Help in any way you can.
>
> Wed May 6: * mhansen (by 2am) -- patches/todo list so anybody can help.
> * robertwb will have reviewed david roe's
> * mabshoff provides bill with symmetrica bug testcase
> * mabshoff fix libtool issue for pynac
> Thu May 7: sage-4.0.alpha0.tar -- ecl; mop up positive review; freebsd
> burcin updated pynac
> (this will better test ecl)
> * wstein, robertwb, nick, mhansen --
> help with pynac/symbolics doctest
>
> Fri May 8: sage-4.0.alpha1.tar -- mhansen's symbolics
> get in david roe's patch
>
> Sat May 9: Sage-4.0 day -- IRC /merge/referee:
> goal: coverage to 75.0%.
> E.g.,
> * wstein or cwitty -- referee implicit plot 3d
> Sun May 10: sage-4.0.rc0.tar (feature freeze)
> * fix singular prompt issue (solaris fix)
> * fix other singular remaining issues.
> Mon May 11: fix fallout; malb fix os x libsingular (?)
>
> Tue May 12: sage-4.0.rc1.tar
>
> Wed May 13:
>
> Thu May 14: sage-4.0.final.tar
>
> Fri May 15: Release sage-4.0.tar.
davidloeffler
patches? I decided I'd spend a few afternoons squashing as many easy
modular forms buglets as I could, with the result that there is now a
bunch of tickets that are "[with patch, needs review]". It would be
cool to get some of these into 4.0, since otherwise they will
inevitably end up conflicting with stuff people do at SD15, and we all
know how tedious it is to rebase patches.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4337
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4357
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5262
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5787
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5792 (Craig's, not mine)
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5923
Regards,
David
Martin Albrecht
>
> Tue May 12: sage-4.0.rc1.tar
>
> Wed May 13:
>
> Thu May 14: sage-4.0.final.tar
>
> Fri May 15: Release sage-4.0.tar.
Well, my plan was to update Singular to 3.1 and PolyBoRi to 0.6 during the
week mentioned above and I was hoping this would make it into Sage 4.0. Of
course, I'll also try to address the OSX libSingular thing.
Martin
--
name: Martin Albrecht
_pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99
_otr: 47F43D1A 5D68C36F 468BAEBA 640E8856 D7951CCF
_www: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~malb
_jab: martinr...@jabber.ccc.de
mabshoff
On May 7, 1:11 am, Martin Albrecht <m...@informatik.uni-bremen.de>
wrote:
>
> > Tue May 12: sage-4.0.rc1.tar
>
> > Wed May 13:
>
> > Thu May 14: sage-4.0.final.tar
>
> > Fri May 15: Release sage-4.0.tar.
>
> Well, my plan was to update Singular to 3.1 and PolyBoRi to 0.6 during the
> week mentioned above and I was hoping this would make it into Sage 4.0. Of
> course, I'll also try to address the OSX libSingular thing.
meshes with the stabilization of 4.0, but in either case a quick 4.0.1
should follow where we want to concentrate on getting all components
up to date so that the next Debian packaging is really up to date.
Re PolyBoRi: I would like to see the boost light split off into its
own spkg so we can update it easily. Bumping to something much more
current would also be a good idea, but I can help out here.
> Martin
Cheers,
Michael
> --
> name: Martin Albrecht
> _pgp:http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99
> _otr: 47F43D1A 5D68C36F 468BAEBA 640E8856 D7951CCF
> _www:http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~malb
mabshoff
On May 7, 12:55 am, davidloeffler <dave.loeff...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can I use this opportunity to request some reviews for modular forms
> patches? I decided I'd spend a few afternoons squashing as many easy
> modular forms buglets as I could, with the result that there is now a
> bunch of tickets that are "[with patch, needs review]". It would be
> cool to get some of these into 4.0, since otherwise they will
> inevitably end up conflicting with stuff people do at SD15, and we all
> know how tedious it is to rebase patches.
Saturday to review & merge, so that might be a good time to poke some
people to do reviews. I think Craig has started the review of some of
those tickets, so we are on the way already.
> Regards,
>
> David
>
Cheers,
Michael
mabshoff
is only little work left to be done: I had resolved all issues in Sage
3.1.2, but neglected to merge all the fixed into subsequent releases.
Issues from 3.1.2 (3.4.2):
* gmp (gone in MPIR)
* ntl (Fixed in ntl-5.4.2.p7.spkg, need to add spkg-check before
posting spkg)
* fplll (update to 3.0.11 - or maybe a future 3.0.12 due to bug that
already existed in 2.x.)
* polybori - fixes:
* src/boost_1_34_1.cropped/boost/mpl/aux_/full_lambda.hpp +230
* src/boost_1_34_1.cropped/boost/mpl/apply.hpp +138
* src/boost_1_34_1.cropped/boost/mpl/bind.hpp +364
* src/boost_1_34_1.cropped/boost/mpl/bind.hpp +531
* src/boost_1_34_1.cropped/boost/mpl/apply_wrap.hpp +81
* src/boost_1_34_1.cropped/boost/mpl/apply_wrap.hpp +173
* clisp - *boom* - might be build problem - will use ecl in
4.0.alpha0 anyway
The main issue I ran into was a bug in libfplll that would crash the
doctest with some probability. The bug is also in the previous fplll
release and I have send a proposed fix upstream, so I am confident we
will have gcc 4.4 support in Sage 4.0. At least two people have either
complained in IRC, so the demand seems to clearly exist. :)
Cheers,
Michael
mabshoff
in the wiki with most of the info here, but it might be a good idea
to
(a) keep it current as things develop
(b) add all missing info about projects, i.e. who is working on
coverage, etc
(c) clean it up in general
Signing off :)
Cheers,
Michael
Nicolas M. Thiery
> Can I use this opportunity to request some reviews for modular forms
> patches?
Let me do the same for the prerequisite patches for the category
framework. They are all in trac now. Having them (or most of them) in
Sage would definitely make it simpler for others to play around with
the category patches during Sage days 15.
cached_in_parent_method-5449-submitted.patch # needs review
lazy_attributes-fixes-5783-final.patch # needs review
unique_representation-5120-submitted.patch # needs review (updated recently)
parent-element_constructor-fix-5979-submitted.patch# needs review
element_wrapper-5967-submitted.patch # needs review
parent-element_constructor-fix-5979-submitted.patch# needs review
cPickle-5985-import-submitted.patch # needs review
cPickle-5985-copy_reg_classes-submitted.patch # needs review
cPickle-5986-nested-classes-submitted.patch # needs review depends on 5483 and 5985
dynamic_class-5991-submitted.patch # needs review depends on 5120 and 5985
transitive_ideal-6000-submitted.patch # needs review
And possibly:
compositions-cleanup-5600-nt.patch
And I would love to see this very useful one in at some point:
explain-pickle-v1.patch # 5483 by cwitty; needs work/review
Sorry, I will be on family duty tomorrow, so I won't be able to join
for the review's day.
Thanks in advance!
Cheers,
Nicolas
PS: by the way: I will be at Sage days from Sunday to Friday. Working
full time on categories with whoever wants to join!
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nth...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
Robert Bradshaw
>
> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 12:55:57AM -0700, davidloeffler wrote:
>> Can I use this opportunity to request some reviews for modular forms
>> patches?
>
> Let me do the same for the prerequisite patches for the category
> framework. They are all in trac now. Having them (or most of them) in
> Sage would definitely make it simpler for others to play around with
> the category patches during Sage days 15.
>
> cached_in_parent_method-5449-submitted.patch # needs review
> lazy_attributes-fixes-5783-final.patch # needs review
> unique_representation-5120-submitted.patch # needs review
> (updated recently)
> parent-element_constructor-fix-5979-submitted.patch# needs review
> element_wrapper-5967-submitted.patch # needs review
> parent-element_constructor-fix-5979-submitted.patch# needs review
>
> cPickle-5985-import-submitted.patch # needs review
> cPickle-5985-copy_reg_classes-submitted.patch # needs review
> cPickle-5986-nested-classes-submitted.patch # needs review
> depends on 5483 and 5985
> dynamic_class-5991-submitted.patch # needs review depends on
> 5120 and 5985
> transitive_ideal-6000-submitted.patch # needs review
I am looking forward to talking to you next week about all this
stuff, but I was thinking it would be useful to have a wiki page
summarizing the "big picture" with the links to relevant tickets, or
at least something more cohesive than the couple of dozen emails
scattered throughout the sage-devel threads.
- Robert
David Roe
David
Nicolas M. Thiery
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 01:25:35PM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> ...
> I am looking forward to talking to you next week about all this
> stuff, but I was thinking it would be useful to have a wiki page
> summarizing the "big picture" with the links to relevant tickets, or
> at least something more cohesive than the couple of dozen emails
> scattered throughout the sage-devel threads.
I am trying to keep the patch description on trac up-to-date (from the
description in the patch itself):
http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/5891
Suggestions for improvement welcome! Let me know if you think a wiki
page would be more convenient.
Cheers,
Nicolas
Robert Bradshaw
>
> Hi Robert!
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 01:25:35PM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> ...
>> I am looking forward to talking to you next week about all this
>> stuff, but I was thinking it would be useful to have a wiki page
>> summarizing the "big picture" with the links to relevant tickets, or
>> at least something more cohesive than the couple of dozen emails
>> scattered throughout the sage-devel threads.
>
> I am trying to keep the patch description on trac up-to-date (from the
> description in the patch itself):
>
> http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/5891
>
> Suggestions for improvement welcome! Let me know if you think a wiki
> page would be more convenient.
That's exactly what I was looking for--thanks. (I didn't realize one
of the tickets was the "main" one.
- Robert
mabshoff
On May 14, 3:41 pm, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu>
wrote:
> > I am trying to keep the patch description on trac up-to-date (from the
> > description in the patch itself):
>
> > http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/5891
>
> > Suggestions for improvement welcome! Let me know if you think a wiki
> > page would be more convenient.
want to see what has changed between revisions on the wiki it is
tedious at best.
> That's exactly what I was looking for--thanks. (I didn't realize one
> of the tickets was the "main" one.
>
> - Robert
Michael
mabshoff
On May 14, 2:00 pm, David Roe <r...@math.harvard.edu> wrote:
> I've taken a look at most of these. I'll send Nicolas comments off list
> (though I probably won't get to that until later tonight). But I agree with
> Robert that a global picture wiki page would be good.
> David
a given ticket. There is no benefit from keeping this communication
private.
Sage-devel is a high volume mailing list and if we can have 100
messages about the GPL in a few days a couple emails about the far
more important category patch set won't be an issue ;)
Cheers,
Michael
Robert Bradshaw
> On May 14, 3:41 pm, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu>
> wrote:
>> On May 14, 2009, at 2:02 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
>>> I am trying to keep the patch description on trac up-to-date
>>> (from the
>>> description in the patch itself):
>>
>>> http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/5891
>>
>>> Suggestions for improvement welcome! Let me know if you think a wiki
>>> page would be more convenient.
>
> Info like this should not go into trac, but on a wiki page. If you
> want to see what has changed between revisions on the wiki it is
> tedious at best.
Looking at the last "changed description" ticket modification, I now
heartily agree. However, I am very glad that this is up at all.
- Robert
mabshoff
On May 15, 2:47 am, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu>
wrote:
> > Info like this should not go into trac, but on a wiki page. If you
> > want to see what has changed between revisions on the wiki it is
> > tedious at best.
> Looking at the last "changed description" ticket modification, I now
> heartily agree. However, I am very glad that this is up at all.
And you can even see the diffs for the description field, i.e.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5891?action=diff&version=10
You will notice that most changes are simple formatting and/or white
space changes, but that is next to impossible to tell from the trac
emails I get. Everything under "Current status:" should be moved to a
wiki page ASAP IMHO. Judging from the ToDo list this isn't even close
to being done, even considering the likely work that will go into this
at SD 15.
Other things will also happen before this patch is merged, i.e. the
Abelian group rewrite with William's new code that is taking lower
priority over new symbolics at the moment - otherwise I assume it
would have made it into Sage 4.0.
> - Robert
Cheers,
Michael
Nicolas M. Thiery
> > > Info like this should not go into trac, but on a wiki page. If you
> > > tedious at best.
By popular demand, this is now:
http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/wiki/CategoriesRoadMap
(on the trac wiki, so as to have nice links to the tickets)
> You will notice that most changes are simple formatting and/or white
> space changes, but that is next to impossible to tell from the trac
> emails I get.
Yeah sorry, I should have used preview when debugging the ReST markup.
> Judging from the ToDo list this isn't even close to being done, even
> considering the likely work that will go into this at SD 15.
Please check out the list again:
- A lot of the items are long run things that should be cleaned up or
improved at some point, but that do the job for the moment. I
marked them as such. If we wait for everything to be perfect, this
will never go in.
- I added today a proof-of-concept example of using categories with
cython classes
- All the renaming thingies should be quick once the decisions are taken
I tend to be overoptimistic, but I think most of the work can be done
at SD 15.
One year ago we got a strong promise for help with the migration of
Sage-Combinat. Volunteers and experts, now is the time when we really
need you!
Cheers,
Nicolas
PS: btw: my trip to France is cancelled; so I'll probably leave
Seattle a bit later, say Saturday or Sunday.