Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Don't repackage examples and extcode on sage-*dist #10231

Closed
jdemeyer opened this issue Nov 7, 2010 · 17 comments
Closed

Don't repackage examples and extcode on sage-*dist #10231

jdemeyer opened this issue Nov 7, 2010 · 17 comments

Comments

@jdemeyer
Copy link

jdemeyer commented Nov 7, 2010

Right now, the version of the following packages is always bumped in every new Sage version:

sage
sage_scripts
extcode
examples

This patch will remove the last two from this list and shift the problem of upgrading these packages to the release manager (i.e. the merger script).

CC: @kini @nexttime

Component: distribution

Keywords: scripts upgrade extcode examples sd32

Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10231

@jdemeyer jdemeyer added this to the sage-4.7.1 milestone Nov 7, 2010
@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

jdemeyer commented Nov 7, 2010

Attachment: 10231_extcode_dist.patch.gz

Remove spkg-dist from extcode (apply to extcode repo)

@jdemeyer jdemeyer changed the title Don't rebuild examples and extcode on sage-*dist Don't repackage examples and extcode on sage-*dist Nov 7, 2010
@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

jdemeyer commented Nov 7, 2010

Attachment: 10231_scripts.patch.gz

Patch for the scripts repo

@jdemeyer

This comment has been minimized.

@kini
Copy link
Contributor

kini commented Apr 4, 2011

comment:5

Well, I'm not sure how to test this, but the code changes look great to me. Hopefully someone who knows what they're saying can give this the go-ahead.

@kiwifb
Copy link
Member

kiwifb commented Apr 4, 2011

comment:6

It would definitely be great to decouple these 2. Since this has been posted we have a new sage_root spkg should something be done here about it as well?

@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

jdemeyer commented Apr 5, 2011

comment:7

I have discussed this ticket a million times on sage-devel and there never was a concensus about it, so I have essentially abandoned this effort. If however everybody suddenly thinks this ticket is a good idea, I'm willing to go ahead.

@kiwifb
Copy link
Member

kiwifb commented Apr 5, 2011

comment:8

I was always in the "for" camp. Unsurprisingly because it is less work for me.
I even suggest that the new version number of the spkg in question should be of the form {extcode,examples}-YYYYMMDD.

While there was no consensus on the list I suspect most people really don't care.

@sagetrac-mariah
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-mariah mannequin commented Jun 14, 2011

comment:9

The patch attachment: 10231_scripts.patch fails to apply to sage-4.7.1.alpha2:

eno% ./sage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Sage Version 4.7.1.alpha2, Release Date: 2011-06-07                |
| Type notebook() for the GUI, and license() for information.        |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
**********************************************************************
*                                                                    *
* Warning: this is a prerelease version, and it may be unstable.     *
*                                                                    *
**********************************************************************
sage: hg_scripts.apply("/home/mariah/10231_scripts.patch")
cd "/home/mariah/sage/sage-4.7.1.alpha2-x86_64-Linux-core2-fc/local/bin" && hg status
cd "/home/mariah/sage/sage-4.7.1.alpha2-x86_64-Linux-core2-fc/local/bin" && hg status
cd "/home/mariah/sage/sage-4.7.1.alpha2-x86_64-Linux-core2-fc/local/bin" && hg import   "/home/mariah/10231_scripts.patch"
applying /home/mariah/10231_scripts.patch
patching file sage-make_devel_packages
Hunk #2 FAILED at 18
Hunk #3 succeeded at 43 with fuzz 2 (offset 1 lines).
Hunk #4 FAILED at 64
2 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file sage-make_devel_packages.rej
patching file sage-sdist
Hunk #1 FAILED at 69
1 out of 1 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file sage-sdist.rej
abort: patch failed to apply
sage:

@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

comment:10

Replying to @sagetrac-mariah:

The patch attachment: 10231_scripts.patch fails to apply to sage-4.7.1.alpha2

Could be. Since there is no consensus about whether this patch is a good idea, I am not going to work on this for now.

@jdemeyer jdemeyer removed this from the sage-4.7.1 milestone Jun 14, 2011
@williamstein
Copy link
Contributor

Changed keywords from scripts upgrade extcode examples to scripts upgrade extcode examples sd32

@nexttime
Copy link
Mannequin

nexttime mannequin commented Aug 27, 2011

Work Issues: At least rebase...

@nexttime
Copy link
Mannequin

nexttime mannequin commented Oct 27, 2011

comment:13

At least we meanwhile got rid of the "examples" spkg / repo, so the resistance may have been halved by that, too. ;-)

I wouldn't delete extcode's spkg-dist btw.; it doesn't hurt and can be used for testing / experimenting, or even still by a / the release manager.

@kiwifb
Copy link
Member

kiwifb commented Oct 27, 2011

comment:14

Replying to @nexttime:

At least we meanwhile got rid of the "examples" spkg / repo, so the resistance may have been halved by that, too. ;-)

I am very happy about that bit really.

I wouldn't delete extcode's spkg-dist btw.; it doesn't hurt and can be used for testing / experimenting, or even still by a / the release manager.

extcode has seen some activity in 4.7.1 and is set to get some activity in 4.7.3 but we should think about these sage specific spkg that are seldom updated.

We got rid of examples what else is low on updates?

@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

comment:15

Closing in the light of the move to GIT.

@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer

@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

Changed work issues from At least rebase... to none

@jdemeyer
Copy link
Author

Changed author from Jeroen Demeyer to none

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants