Opened 10 years ago
Last modified 6 years ago
#10826 needs_work enhancement
Make numpy support SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS
Reported by: | jason | Owned by: | tbd |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-6.4 |
Component: | packages: standard | Keywords: | sd32 |
Cc: | Merged in: | ||
Authors: | Jason Grout | Reviewers: | David Kirkby |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
This ticket implements #10823 for numpy. New spkg at http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/jason/spkg-docs/numpy-1.5.1.p0.spkg (depends on #10792)
Attachments (1)
Change History (24)
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to needs_info
See my comments on #10828 I'm not saying this needs work, as it might not do, but if its anything like the matplotlib case, a lot of unnecessary files get copied.
We should clarify this before marking this for review.
Dave
comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by
- Reviewers set to David Kirkby
comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_info to needs_review
The numpy docs that are copied contain just the standalone built files, not the full doc source directory.
comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
I'm surprised there's a data file objects.inv, but overall it looks fine.
Dave
comment:8 Changed 10 years ago by
According to http://sphinx.pocoo.org/ext/intersphinx.html, that file helps Sphinx provide interlinking between documentation. I think you're probably right that it isn't strictly necessary, but I'll bet there is a way to provide interlinking between Sage's, Scipy's, and numpy's documentation if we have that file (as a future project).
comment:9 Changed 10 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-4.7 to sage-feature
comment:10 Changed 10 years ago by
Why is the milestone now a "sage-feature"? Is there any reason it can't go into 4.7, given it has a positive review?
Dave
comment:11 follow-up: ↓ 12 Changed 10 years ago by
I use sage-feature as a placeholder for tickets with positive review which can't or won't be merged. This ticket depends on #10792 which does not have positive review, so it can't be merged yet. Sorry, I should have mentioned this.
comment:12 in reply to: ↑ 11 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to jdemeyer:
I use sage-feature as a placeholder for tickets with positive review which can't or won't be merged. This ticket depends on #10792 which does not have positive review, so it can't be merged yet. Sorry, I should have mentioned this.
If one click' on sage-feature, one gets This is the "big feature" milestone. Tickets assigned here should have somebody responsible for the issue. Once a feature is ready to go in please retag the ticket to the next appropriate milestone and attach a patch/bundle/link to an spkg.
The above description of "sage-feature" does not match the situation on here. Perhaps a new milestone should be created, specifically to address the case of tickets with positive review, but depending on other tickets.
Dave
comment:13 Changed 10 years ago by
Or in the longer term, maybe we should install a trac dependency tracker. For example, something like this:
http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/MasterTicketsPlugin
or this
comment:14 Changed 10 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-feature to sage-4.7
#10792 now has positive review.
comment:15 Changed 10 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-4.7.alpha2
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
comment:16 Changed 10 years ago by
- Merged in sage-4.7.alpha2 deleted
- Resolution fixed deleted
- Status changed from closed to new
comment:17 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from new to needs_work
Dan Drake wrote on sage-devel:
Hrm. There is a problem with numpy when SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS is set. Here's the relevant part of the log:
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/drake/s/sage-4.7.alpha4/spkg/build/numpy-1.5.1.p0/src/doc' mkdir -p build touch build/generate-stamp mkdir -p build/html build/doctrees LANG=C sphinx-build -b html -d build/doctrees source build/html /bin/sh: sphinx-build: not found make[2]: *** [html] Error 127 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/drake/s/sage-4.7.alpha4/spkg/build/numpy-1.5.1.p0/src/doc' Error building numpy docs.
This is a fresh build from source. It looks like we need to alter the build dependencies to get Sphinx built early. Or perhaps the spkg installation script could check to see if the INSTALL_DOCS variable is set, and if so, check that Sphinx is built?
The tricky thing here seems to be that the build deps are different if SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS is set.
I installed the Sphinx spkg and restarted the build, but now I get:
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/drake/s/sage-4.7.alpha4/spkg/build/numpy-1.5.1.p0/src/doc' mkdir -p build touch build/generate-stamp mkdir -p build/html build/doctrees LANG=C sphinx-build -b html -d build/doctrees source build/html Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/drake/s/sage-4.7.alpha4/local/bin/sphinx-build", line 6, in <module> import sage.all ImportError: No module named sage.all make[2]: *** [html] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/drake/s/sage-4.7.alpha4/spkg/build/numpy-1.5.1.p0/src/doc' Error building numpy docs.
Yikes. Do we need the Sage library before we can build any Sphinx documents? Do we need to build documents *after* the usual build process is done?
comment:18 Changed 10 years ago by
See #11197 for bulding docs after the sage build
comment:19 Changed 9 years ago by
- Keywords sd32 added
comment:20 Changed 7 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-5.11 to sage-5.12
comment:21 Changed 7 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.1 to sage-6.2
comment:22 Changed 7 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.2 to sage-6.3
comment:23 Changed 6 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.3 to sage-6.4
See comments on #10828