[Debian-science-sagemath] pari-sage or pari ?

[Jerome BENOIT]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi,

On 21/08/16 21:44, Ximin Luo wrote:
> jdemeyer at cage.ugent.be:
>> 
>>> If you wanted to make it easier for us (and other OS
>>> distributions), you can generally put more emphasis on
>>> upstreaming your patches more quickly
>> 
>> You seem to think that we have any control over upstream. We can
>> only propose a patch to upstream andere hope they accept it...
>> 
> 
> No, I don't think you "control upstream", and the fact you're saying
> this, shows that you don't understand what it means to work in the
> broader FOSS community. The whole point is that you *do not* have
> control over many of your dependencies. Gradually one learns how to
> work *with* this fact instead of *against* it.
> 
> As a concrete example: you *do* have control over what code Sage
> accepts. So, as I suggested below, you can delay accepting certain
> patches into Sage, until upstream patches are applied - especially
> minor ones (3 lines) that have a major outside effect (~15 failed
> tests in Sage) - and encourage or require Sage contributors to first
> upstream their patches. Or, you write your code against the current
> bad upstream API, and add a TODO and a description of how to change
> it to use the good one, when your patch finally gets accepted.
> 
> These types of things are all what FOSS projects are expected to do,
> what they are supposed to do. Yes they carry a slight cost - that is
> the cost of interoperation, as I mentioned before. And once you
> practice doing this workflow, the cost reduces further.
> 
> I can appreciate that perhaps releases of academic software do not
> follow the same standards as other FOSS software.

To my experience and knowledge, most academic (I guess you meant scientific) softwares follows
this standard which above all is just common sense. I will add especially for an umbrella software
package as Sage.

(((Please keep in mind that academic/scientific world is not the one which follows:
www and big data were invented at CERN; the first computer folks were mathematicians
and physicists; Word is not the first `word processor', thanks to Knuth; and so forth.
We have a different background and certainly a different way of programming mostly because
we work with different `objects' and in a richer environment, this is true, but we do not
lake of common sense. May be Sage used to target potential users able and ready to hack to
install their favourite software packages. But here, I am agree to say that this approach
is no more applicable: here Sage is not a marvellous CAS, but just a regular software among
others.)))

Jerome


 But in this case,
> it's even more important to push your patches upstream, to benefit
> their users.
> 
>>> For example, I don't understand why this patch [1] has not yet
>>> been accepted. All you have to do is write some unit tests.
>> 
>> That is maybe the only example where Sage is to blame that a patch
>> is not accepted upstream.
>> 
> 
> Don't be so sure. I found this one yesterday evening and it took our
> test failures down from 319 to 303. There are still plenty left.
> 
> X
> 

- -- 
Jerome BENOIT, Ph.D. | jgmbenoit-at+rezozer*dot_net
http://www.rezozer.net/

- -- 
Jerome BENOIT | calculus+at-rezozer^dot*net
https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=calculus@rezozer.net
AE28 AE15 710D FF1D 87E5  A762 3F92 19A6 7F36 C68B
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=
=DUiU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----