Ticket #11106 (closed enhancement: fixed)
Make location of notebook style files configurable
| Reported by: | flint | Owned by: | jason, mpatel, was |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | minor | Milestone: | sage-4.7.2 |
| Component: | notebook | Keywords: | notebook, style, sd31 |
| Cc: | burcin, mhansen, jdemeyer | Work issues: | |
| Report Upstream: | N/A | Reviewers: | Burcin Erocal |
| Authors: | Achim Fassbender, Radoslav Kirov | Merged in: | sage-4.7.2.alpha1 |
| Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by flint) (diff)
Developers working on the customization of the notebook style for a site installation might wish to easily switch between different styles. The patch offered here adds the following functionality to sage notebook: If the environment variable SAGENB_TEMPLATE_PATH is defined then its value is taken as the location the style files are loaded from. Otherwise they are loaded from a default location as before.
Attachments
-
nb_style_environ_variable.patch
(946 bytes) -
added by flint 2 years ago.
- sets up new environment variable for location of notebook style files
Change History
Changed 2 years ago by flint
-
attachment
nb_style_environ_variable.patch
added
comment:2 Changed 2 years ago by burcin
- Cc burcin added
- Status changed from new to needs_info
- Authors changed from burcin, flint to Achim Fassbender
Open for discussion at:
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-notebook/t/aa8a82a2b288f8ff
I understand that there is a notebook rewrite going on, but we'd really appreciate it if there was a more official way to style a notebook server. Maybe we should look into providing a similar patch for the new flask server as well.
comment:3 Changed 2 years ago by rkirov
looks good. merged in the flask rewrite of the notebook. Added checking if the directory actually exists.
http://code.google.com/r/rkirov-flask/source/detail?r=5f1cd22d52f2e72eff065653a41cb0816cd4675f
comment:4 Changed 2 years ago by rkirov
- Keywords style, sd31 added; style removed
- Status changed from needs_info to needs_review
comment:5 follow-up: ↓ 6 Changed 2 years ago by burcin
- Cc mhansen, jdemeyer added
- Reviewers set to Burcin Erocal
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
- Authors changed from Achim Fassbender to Achim Fassbender, Rado Kirov
What is the procedure to close notebook tickets? This was merged in the flask notebook, so it can be closed.
comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 5 Changed 2 years ago by jdemeyer
Replying to burcin:
What is the procedure to close notebook tickets? This was merged in the flask notebook, so it can be closed.
It all depends how the "flask notebook" should be merged into Sage.
comment:7 Changed 2 years ago by jdemeyer
- Milestone changed from sage-4.7.1 to sage-4.7.2
*ping*
how should the flask notebook be merged?
comment:8 follow-up: ↓ 9 Changed 2 years ago by rkirov
not sure if I should be answering this, but i am guessing it will become a separate spkg. Is there an obvious problem with this?
comment:9 in reply to: ↑ 8 ; follow-up: ↓ 10 Changed 2 years ago by jdemeyer
Replying to rkirov:
not sure if I should be answering this, but i am guessing it will become a separate spkg. Is there an obvious problem with this?
Rado, do you mean a new spkg in addition to the existing "sagenb" or will it be inside "sagenb"?
There is no problem with this but I think it is something that you really should think about. As I mentioned on http://groups.google.com/group/sage-release/browse_frm/thread/758ac9a5106f5d4f, I would like the flask notebook to be either
(a) 100% part of Sage, in which case it is simply a set of patches on Trac which should be merged in the usual way by the Sage release manager.
(b) 0% part of Sage, i.e. a completely separate project with a separate release manager and a separate bug tracker which will give me a complete spkg to be merged into Sage.
I believe that anything between these two extremes would create extra complications. Currently, option (a) holds for sagenb. I would not find it a problem if it starts out as (b) in the development phase but once it's merged it reverts back to (a), i.e. part of Sage.
Also keep in mind that a few tickets deal mostly with the Sage library but still need patches to sagenb, so maybe (a) would be a slightly better solution. Recent examples: #9976, #10052.
comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 2 years ago by rkirov
Replying to jdemeyer:
Replying to rkirov:
not sure if I should be answering this, but i am guessing it will become a separate spkg. Is there an obvious problem with this?
Rado, do you mean a new spkg in addition to the existing "sagenb" or will it be inside "sagenb"?
There is no problem with this but I think it is something that you really should think about. As I mentioned on http://groups.google.com/group/sage-release/browse_frm/thread/758ac9a5106f5d4f, I would like the flask notebook to be either
(a) 100% part of Sage, in which case it is simply a set of patches on Trac which should be merged in the usual way by the Sage release manager.
(b) 0% part of Sage, i.e. a completely separate project with a separate release manager and a separate bug tracker which will give me a complete spkg to be merged into Sage.
I believe that anything between these two extremes would create extra complications. Currently, option (a) holds for sagenb. I would not find it a problem if it starts out as (b) in the development phase but once it's merged it reverts back to (a), i.e. part of Sage.
Also keep in mind that a few tickets deal mostly with the Sage library but still need patches to sagenb, so maybe (a) would be a slightly better solution. Recent examples: #9976, #10052.
reply in sage-release not to pollute the ticket.
comment:11 Changed 22 months ago by jdemeyer
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
- Resolution set to fixed
- Merged in set to sage-4.7.2.alpha1
comment:12 Changed 19 months ago by jdemeyer
- Authors changed from Achim Fassbender, Rado Kirov to Achim Fassbender, Radoslav Kirov
sets up new environment variable for location of notebook style files