Opened 6 years ago

Last modified 4 months ago

#14645 needs_info defect

cvxopt 1.1.8 fails to build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes

Reported by: strogdon Owned by: leif
Priority: major Milestone: sage-8.2
Component: packages: standard Keywords: spkg
Cc: dimpase, vbraun, schilly, mvngu Merged in:
Authors: Leif Leonhardy, Dima Pasechnik, Jeroen Demeyer Reviewers: Dima Pasechnik
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: public/14645 (Commits) Commit: 61f5908f93de4a110c04de76ddc6e8e8f9965373
Dependencies: #24972 Stopgaps:

Description (last modified by dimpase)

This is because the pre-built HTML were removed, and building docs using sphinx was off.

Attachments (1)

cvxopt-1.1.6.p0-p1.diff (5.8 KB) - added by leif 6 years ago.
Diff between the .p0 and the .p1. For reference / review only.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (77)

Changed 6 years ago by leif

Diff between the .p0 and the .p1. For reference / review only.

comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by leif

  • Cc dimpase vbraun added
  • Description modified (diff)
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:2 in reply to: ↑ description Changed 6 years ago by leif

Replying to leif:

  • Run more tests in spkg-check (i.e., those in src/examples/book/ as well).

P.S.: Tested with SAGE_CHECK=yes on Ubuntu 10.04.4 x86 and x86_64 (FSF GCC 4.7.2 and 4.8.0, respectively).

comment:3 follow-ups: Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

tested with SAGE_CHECK=yes on Sage 5.9 OSX10.6.8 (native lapack/blas), all good.

I understand that cvxopt docs not integrated into Sage Reference manual, but are installed in SAGE_LOCAL/share/. Wouldn't it be good to add a link somewhere in Reference manual to SAGE_LOCAL/share/ ? Otherwise it's quite hard to find, unless you know something either not really documented, IMHO.

How does one force doc building/installing? I tried

SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes sage -f cvxopt-1.1.6.p1.spkg

to no avail.

comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 3 ; follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by leif

Replying to dimpase:

I understand that cvxopt docs not integrated into Sage Reference manual, but are installed in SAGE_LOCAL/share/. Wouldn't it be good to add a link somewhere in Reference manual to SAGE_LOCAL/share/ ? Otherwise it's quite hard to find, unless you know something either not really documented, IMHO.

How does one force doc building/installing? I tried

SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes sage -f cvxopt-1.1.6.p1.spkg

to no avail.

? They're in $SAGE_ROOT/local/share/doc/cvxopt/html/, indeed probably hard to find ...

comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

Replying to leif:

Replying to dimpase:

I understand that cvxopt docs not integrated into Sage Reference manual, but are installed in SAGE_LOCAL/share/. Wouldn't it be good to add a link somewhere in Reference manual to SAGE_LOCAL/share/ ? Otherwise it's quite hard to find, unless you know something either not really documented, IMHO.

How does one force doc building/installing? I tried

SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes sage -f cvxopt-1.1.6.p1.spkg

to no avail.

? They're in $SAGE_ROOT/local/share/doc/cvxopt/html/, indeed probably hard to find ...

I looked at the install log, and it didn't say anything :-) Please add a message saying that docs were installed (and where to)...

comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 3 ; follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

Replying to dimpase:

Wouldn't it be good to add a link somewhere in Reference manual to SAGE_LOCAL/share/ ?

rather, to SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc/, The main problem is how to add a relative link. One can in principle do ../../../../...../local/share/doc/ somewhere in doc/<LANG>/website/templates/index.html, but I'm not sure it's a good idea (IMHO the idea to put any docs in $SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc/ is not so good... )
Perhaps at least there should be a symbolic link sage/doc/local pointing there, although I'm not sure how well this works with webservers.
If this is OK then I can create a patch (hmm, but how? Does hg understand symbolic links? Or it should be in some script, this link creation?)

comment:7 in reply to: ↑ 6 Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

  • Cc schilly added
  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_info

Harald, as this is www-related (docs structure), could you comment please?

comment:8 follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by schilly

  • Cc mvngu added

Uhm, I can't really follow you, sorry … also, the website is rather independent from what you might want to do inside Sage. Is there anything already existing that's similar to what you try to do here? Also, the documentation is usually maintained by minh, I've CCed him.

What I found is this dedicated page: http://www.sagemath.org/doc/numerical_sage/cvxopt.html

comment:9 follow-ups: Changed 6 years ago by vbraun

The docs should link to upstream (http://cvxopt.org) and not to a local file that isn't even installed unless you build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes. Also, the link in http://www.sagemath.org/doc/numerical_sage/cvxopt.html is broken.

comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

Replying to vbraun:

The docs should link to upstream (http://cvxopt.org) and not to a local file that isn't even installed unless you build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes. Also, the link in http://www.sagemath.org/doc/numerical_sage/cvxopt.html is broken.

we can have SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc/cvxopt/index.html redirecting to cvxopt.org by default, and overwrite it with the local docs if SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes during the cvxopt installation.

But there is much more stuff there than just cvxopt docs. E.g. I have currently, on Sage 5.9,

NTL				ipython				ppl
cvxopt				mpfr				pwl
eclib				networkx-1.7.dev_20130506064154	sagetex

and again these docs are largely lost to a typical user. I wonder why are they (except cvxopt, that was explicitly installed with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS on) there in the first place. It looks like the other packages ignore the value of SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS, no?

comment:11 in reply to: ↑ 8 Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

Replying to schilly:

Uhm, I can't really follow you, sorry … also, the website is rather independent from what you might want to do inside Sage.

oops, I meant the setup when the sagenb server is run on a remote host (rather than on localhost); then the docs are served somehow via a web interface, isn't it?

Generally speaking, do Unix webservers allow symbolic links in the docs they serve?

comment:12 Changed 6 years ago by vbraun

Any feature requests beyond installing cvxopt should go to a different ticket.

Some packages just install their docs by default. Unfortunately, correct usage of autotools often eludes upsteam, requiring manual copying of documentation if desired. The latter is only attempted if SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS is set.

Apache disallows symlinks by default. Not that that would help with http://sagemath.org, there we serve only the Sage docs and not a complete Sage installation afaik.

comment:13 Changed 6 years ago by schilly

Replying to dimpase:

oops, I meant the setup when the sagenb server is run on a remote host (rather than on localhost); then the docs are served somehow via a web interface, isn't it?

yes, but i don't know enough about sagenb/notebook server to give you any answer, sorry. there are also related issues, e.g. that the sagenb/notebook server doesn't show documentation in other languages – but that's in my eyes outside of the scope of this ticket.

Generally speaking, do Unix webservers allow symbolic links in the docs they serve?

yes and no. the documentation on the sage website is served as static file via apache. Following symlinks is explicitly enabled and it's basically just a copy/paste of the output files. What the notebook server does is different, because it serves the files via its own server – there is also this live-documentation served via /doc/live/…

So, in conclusion, there are (at least?) three independent things moving around:

  • local installation of Sage
  • Sage Documentation at sagemath.org/doc (that's where mvgnu and I can weight in, we also have our own script that updates sagemath.org/help.html)
  • sagenb.org [and others] /doc/live/ <- and the menu that's in the help popup window.

comment:14 in reply to: ↑ 9 ; follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

  • Status changed from needs_info to needs_review

Replying to vbraun:

The docs should link to upstream (http://cvxopt.org) and not to a local file that isn't even installed unless you build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes.

actually my idea about the main index.html is not listing individual packages, but just a general link to SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc for "more stuff"... OK, I will open a separate ticket, and set this one to positive review, as soon as my request for a message saying that docs were installed (and where to) in spkg-install is honoured.

PS. I've opened #14646 to deal with the main index.html, etc.

Last edited 6 years ago by dimpase (previous) (diff)

comment:15 Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_work

comment:16 in reply to: ↑ 14 ; follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by leif

Replying to dimpase:

OK, I will open a separate ticket, and set this one to positive review, as soon as my request for a message saying that docs were installed (and where to) in spkg-install is honoured.

I was actually first going to add that, but then did not for a couple of reasons:

  • I hate absolute paths there (as have unfortunately been added back to (additional) messages in the "main" docbuilding, although the messages there are even worse, since they claim the documents had been built even upon errors), but was 100% sure at least some would complain about a relative path in the message.
  • Most other packages don't.
  • Then I'd also added a message in case SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS!=yes, telling that the [HTML] docs have not been installed (and why), and how one can change that, which is pretty redundant, as that should be the same for all spkgs.

Orthogonal to that:

Should I delete previous (potentially outdated) docs regardless of SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS, which could probably be considered unexpected behaviour? (E.g. if one reinstalls an spkg just with different flags, or in order to run its test suite, but forgets to set SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS to the previous setting? Does anyone use that variable on a per-package basis? To me it seems a few people have it set in their shell rcs, and most people don't use it, probably just because they don't know about... B) )

comment:17 Changed 6 years ago by leif

  • Reviewers set to Dmitrii Pasechnik
  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_info

comment:18 in reply to: ↑ 16 ; follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

Replying to leif:

Replying to dimpase:

OK, I will open a separate ticket, and set this one to positive review, as soon as my request for a message saying that docs were installed (and where to) in spkg-install is honoured.

I was actually first going to add that, but then did not for a couple of reasons:

  • I hate absolute paths there (as have unfortunately been added back to (additional) messages in the "main" docbuilding, although the messages there are even worse, since they claim the documents had been built even upon errors), but was 100% sure at least some would complain about a relative path in the message.

well, how about just saying "installed in SAGE_SHARE/doc" ?

  • Most other packages don't.

fix them :–) (not on this ticket...)

  • Then I'd also added a message in case SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS!=yes, telling that the [HTML] docs have not been installed (and why), and how one can change that, which is pretty redundant, as that should be the same for all spkgs.

Orthogonal to that:

Should I delete previous (potentially outdated) docs regardless of SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS, which could probably be considered unexpected behaviour? (E.g. if one reinstalls an spkg just with different flags, or in order to run its test suite, but forgets to set SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS to the previous setting? Does anyone use that variable on a per-package basis? To me it seems a few people have it set in their shell rcs, and most people don't use it, probably just because they don't know about... B) )

if they are in "wrong" location, yes. Otherwise, that's probably too much trouble --- although I as proposed on #14646, there ought to be a default SAGE_SHARE/doc/cvxopt/index.html forwarding to cvxopt website, so, ideally, SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS!=yes would mean putting this forwarding back in place... Well, even more ideally, this functionality shouldn't be on the spkg-install level, but above, at sage -i level.

comment:19 in reply to: ↑ 18 ; follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by leif

Replying to dimpase:

Replying to leif:

I was actually first going to add that, but then did not for a couple of reasons:

  • I hate absolute paths there (as have unfortunately been added back to (additional) messages in the "main" docbuilding, although the messages there are even worse, since they claim the documents had been built even upon errors), but was 100% sure at least some would complain about a relative path in the message.

well, how about just saying "installed in SAGE_SHARE/doc" ?

That's kind of a relative path... [I would have used] ;-)


Orthogonal to that:

Should I delete previous (potentially outdated) docs regardless of SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS, which could probably be considered unexpected behaviour? (E.g. if one reinstalls an spkg just with different flags, or in order to run its test suite, but forgets to set SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS to the previous setting? Does anyone use that variable on a per-package basis? To me it seems a few people have it set in their shell rcs, and most people don't use it, probably just because they don't know about... B) )

if they are in "wrong" location, yes. Otherwise, that's probably too much trouble --- although I as proposed on #14646, there ought to be a default SAGE_SHARE/doc/cvxopt/index.html forwarding to cvxopt website, so, ideally, SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS!=yes would mean putting this forwarding back in place... Well, even more ideally, this functionality shouldn't be on the spkg-install level, but above, at sage -i level.

So, should I move the rm -rf ... out of the if [ "$SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS" = yes ] ... branch? (With a separate message on what's going on ... :-) )

comment:20 in reply to: ↑ 19 Changed 6 years ago by dimpase

Replying to leif: right, go ahead :)

comment:21 Changed 6 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Milestone changed from sage-5.11 to sage-5.12

comment:22 Changed 5 years ago by vbraun_spam

  • Milestone changed from sage-6.1 to sage-6.2

comment:23 Changed 5 years ago by vbraun_spam

  • Milestone changed from sage-6.2 to sage-6.3

comment:24 Changed 5 years ago by vbraun_spam

  • Milestone changed from sage-6.3 to sage-6.4

comment:25 follow-up: Changed 3 years ago by mkoeppe

  • Milestone changed from sage-6.4 to sage-7.3
  • Status changed from needs_info to needs_work

This needs updating for the current (new-style package) 1.1.8p1.

comment:26 in reply to: ↑ 25 Changed 3 years ago by leif

Replying to mkoeppe:

This needs updating for the current (new-style package) 1.1.8p1.

Yes, people keep updating packages without fixing long-standing issues.

comment:27 Changed 3 years ago by leif

Let me add that I won't waste my time with rebasing more than three years old patches the next days.

comment:28 Changed 3 years ago by mkoeppe

  • Milestone changed from sage-7.3 to sage-7.4

Right.

comment:29 Changed 3 years ago by dimpase

  • Summary changed from cvxopt 1.1.6.p0 fails to build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes to cvxopt 1.1.8 fails to build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes

IMHO the idea is that html docs should be built, and then installed, not just copied from provided html/* ?

comment:30 Changed 3 years ago by dimpase

  • Authors changed from Leif Leonhardy to Leif Leonhardy, Dima Pasechnik
  • Branch set to public/14645
  • Commit set to 22ac42a38f2ab53fe03af2465a6dc54cf04e7338
  • Dependencies #12832 deleted
  • Description modified (diff)
  • Reviewers changed from Dmitrii Pasechnik to Dima Pasechnik
  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_review

this is a minimal fix to docs being built/installed. Feel free to add more stuff, or just set it to positive review...


New commits:

22ac42aminimal fix to ensure that docs build/install

comment:31 Changed 18 months ago by mderickx

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_work

Merge conflict with sage 8.1.beta3 needs to be resolved.

comment:32 Changed 18 months ago by fbissey

From experience on the sphinx upgrade ticket, you may want to add typing along with sphinx. And it should be on the other side of the | since you don't need to rebuild cvxopt each time sphinx or typing is upgraded.

comment:33 Changed 18 months ago by fbissey

You may have to depend on #23023 because of typing. The ticket is merged but not in a released beta yet.

comment:34 Changed 18 months ago by dimpase

  • Dependencies set to #23023

comment:35 Changed 18 months ago by git

  • Commit changed from 22ac42a38f2ab53fe03af2465a6dc54cf04e7338 to 83dd36eeae566f523c7e627ff09b15f94752f38e

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

ba68e21minimal fix to ensure that docs build/install
2ea32c1Upgrade to Sphinx 1.6.3
81253e8Merge branch 'develop' into sphinx16
7bbfe54conform typing to the new boiler plate.
6930d06Remove language specific targeting as upstream has removed at least the only one we are using.
56bffcctrac 23023:
039c7f9Merge branch 'develop' into sphinx-1.6.3
c488967Add typing to DOC_DEPENDENCIES
83dd36eMerge branch 'u/fbissey/sphinx1.6.3' of trac.sagemath.org:sage into cvxdocs

comment:36 follow-up: Changed 18 months ago by dimpase

rebased and merged with the branch on #23023, but I am getting now

[cvxopt-1.1.8.p2] pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'sphinxcontrib-websupport' distribution was not found and is required by Sphinx
[cvxopt-1.1.8.p2] make[2]: *** [Makefile:30: html] Error 1

if I try to build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes

Any idea what sphinxcontrib-websupport is all about? Is it another sphinx package we need to distribute, but we don't?

comment:37 in reply to: ↑ 36 Changed 18 months ago by fbissey

Replying to dimpase:

rebased and merged with the branch on #23023, but I am getting now

[cvxopt-1.1.8.p2] pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'sphinxcontrib-websupport' distribution was not found and is required by Sphinx
[cvxopt-1.1.8.p2] make[2]: *** [Makefile:30: html] Error 1

if I try to build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes

Any idea what sphinxcontrib-websupport is all about? Is it another sphinx package we need to distribute, but we don't?

Yes it is a runtime dependency. It used to be part of sphinx proper. I had to write a new ebuild for it for Gentoo (actually it was a bit more complicated than that but I digress). So far we didn't appear to have a use for it in sage, cvxopt is the first package to require it.

comment:38 Changed 18 months ago by dimpase

Indeed, build with SAGE_SPKG_INSTALL_DOCS=yes completes after

./sage --pip install sphinxcontrib-websupport

Do we thus open another ticket to make it a standard (pip) package?

comment:39 Changed 18 months ago by fbissey

It would be acceptable to me for it to be part of this ticket.

comment:40 Changed 18 months ago by dimpase

  • Dependencies changed from #23023 to #23023, #23764
  • Milestone changed from sage-7.4 to sage-8.1

#23764 deals with the apparent problem with adding sphinxcontrib-websupport as a package...

comment:41 Changed 18 months ago by git

  • Commit changed from 83dd36eeae566f523c7e627ff09b15f94752f38e to f97addade521c564a4bf116047aaf00cc5a98ba2

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

f97addaadded sphinxcontrib_websupport

comment:42 Changed 18 months ago by dimpase

  • Dependencies changed from #23023, #23764 to #23023
  • Description modified (diff)

added sphinxcontrib_websupport as a standard package. (As I don't see how a standard package may depend on an optional one).

comment:43 Changed 18 months ago by dimpase

  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_review

comment:44 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Dependencies #23023 deleted

comment:45 follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
  1. The dependencies are not quite right: sphinx depends on sphinxcontrib-websupport, not the other way around. Also, it makes little sense to add sphinxcontrib-websupport as direct dependency of cvxopt. Adding sphinx should be sufficient.

In cvxopt/spkg-install:

  1. You can simplify
        if [ -d $SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc/cvxopt/html ] ; then
           rm -rf $SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc/cvxopt/html
        fi
    

to

       rm -rf "$SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc/cvxopt/html"
  1. You should quote "$SAGE_LOCAL"
  1. It would be good to fix the indentation: use 4 spaces and also indent the comments.

comment:46 in reply to: ↑ 45 ; follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

Replying to jdemeyer:

  1. The dependencies are not quite right: sphinx depends on sphinxcontrib-websupport, not the other way around.

I don't understand, are you saying one can install sphinxcontrib-websupport without installing sphinx first? This sounds strange to me, as the former is a component of the latter.

Also, it makes little sense to add sphinxcontrib-websupport as direct dependency of cvxopt. Adding sphinx should be sufficient.

Only if the dependencies are changed as you proposed.

comment:47 in reply to: ↑ 46 ; follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

Replying to gh-dimpase:

I don't understand, are you saying one can install sphinxcontrib-websupport without installing sphinx first?

Yes indeed.

This sounds strange to me, as the former is a component of the latter.

It's not really a component. It's more like an extra package.

comment:48 in reply to: ↑ 47 ; follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

Replying to jdemeyer:

Replying to gh-dimpase:

I don't understand, are you saying one can install sphinxcontrib-websupport without installing sphinx first?

Yes indeed.

This sounds strange to me, as the former is a component of the latter.

It's not really a component. It's more like an extra package.

sphinxcontrib-webuspport provides a Python API to easily integrate 
Sphinx documentation into your Web application.

From this one concludes that it is useless without sphinx, and thus it is its optional component. Do you know other uses for it? I don't.

comment:49 in reply to: ↑ 48 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

Replying to gh-dimpase:

From this one concludes that it is useless without sphinx, and thus it is its optional component.

It's not optional. Even if you don't use it, Sphinx won't run without sphinxcontrib-websupport.

comment:50 Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

huh? This ticket adds sphinxcontrib-websupport as a package! We never shipped it before.

comment:51 follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by fbissey

Because in sphinx 1.5.x and under it was a part of sphinx. It has been split off in 1.6.

comment:52 in reply to: ↑ 51 Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

Replying to fbissey:

Because in sphinx 1.5.x and under it was a part of sphinx. It has been split off in 1.6.

thanks for clarification. This seems to explain the mutual confusion over the dependence hierarchy.

comment:53 Changed 11 months ago by git

  • Commit changed from f97addade521c564a4bf116047aaf00cc5a98ba2 to 20a33538216652da6fb840ad685020388eba1446

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

c853c73Merge branch 'public/14645' of trac.sagemath.org:sage into t14645
20a3353reviewer's comments on cvxopt/spkg-install

comment:54 follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Milestone changed from sage-8.1 to sage-8.2
  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_review

I have fixed spkg-install as requested, and left the deps as they were.

comment:55 in reply to: ↑ 54 ; follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_work

Replying to gh-dimpase:

left the deps as they were.

Why? They are wrong!

comment:56 in reply to: ↑ 55 Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

Replying to jdemeyer:

Replying to gh-dimpase:

left the deps as they were.

Why? They are wrong!

No they are not! Why are you saying that Sphinx won't run without sphinxcontrib-websupport while it is perfectly doing this on the current beta? Do you think I have added a link to the tarball merely as work of art?

comment:57 Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_review

comment:58 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_work

comment:59 Changed 11 months ago by dimpase

  • Status changed from needs_work to positive_review

English please.

comment:60 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Status changed from positive_review to needs_work

comment:61 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

Please wait... I will explain but you need to give me time to do that.

comment:62 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

I'm splitting the "package sphinxcontrib-websupport" part of this ticket as #24972.

comment:63 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Dependencies set to #24972
  • Description modified (diff)

comment:64 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Authors changed from Leif Leonhardy, Dima Pasechnik to Leif Leonhardy, Dima Pasechnik, Jeroen Demeyer

comment:65 Changed 11 months ago by git

  • Commit changed from 20a33538216652da6fb840ad685020388eba1446 to 6cb6c93f9a4be82018738c3c75a123a4a431a7f9

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

9abfc71minimal fix to ensure that docs build/install
6cb6c93Further fixes to docbuilding of cvxopt

comment:66 follow-up: Changed 11 months ago by dimpase

I would most appreciate no silent switches of the ticket status back to "needs work". I find this very rude.

comment:67 in reply to: ↑ 66 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

Replying to dimpase:

I would most appreciate no silent switches of the ticket status back to "needs work".

I had to set it back to "needs work" because it was wrong and I didn't want anybody accidentally setting this to "positive review" in that state.

The reason for the silence is that I need more time to test things, gather evidence and explain you properly why it is wrong.

comment:68 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:69 Changed 11 months ago by dimpase

  • Description modified (diff)

How hard is to add a comment saying "I need more time to explain"? Otherwise I take it as "I have already explained this" and it makes makes me feel stupid.

And I am most probably not the only one who gets upset this way.

Last edited 11 months ago by dimpase (previous) (diff)

comment:70 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

Sorry for that.

comment:71 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

I tried to explain on #24972.

comment:72 Changed 11 months ago by git

  • Commit changed from 6cb6c93f9a4be82018738c3c75a123a4a431a7f9 to 61f5908f93de4a110c04de76ddc6e8e8f9965373

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

f5dd6dbadded sphinxcontrib_websupport
8ecd93cMinor fixes to sphinxcontrib_websupport
4bfdc4aminimal fix to ensure that docs build/install
61f5908Further fixes to docbuilding of cvxopt

comment:73 Changed 11 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_review

comment:74 Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

I wonder whether the call to the sphinx-build command needs some MathJax-specific options. This is cause I get source TeX formulas in e.g. SAGE_LOCAL/share/doc/cvxopt/fftw.html (compare it with http://cvxopt.org/userguide/fftw.html)

It could also be that some other things need to be done to get MathJax working here, I don't know (perhaps it's not relevant to this ticket)

comment:75 Changed 11 months ago by gh-dimpase

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_info

On ​http://cvxopt.org/userguide/fftw.html there is no MathJax, they generate png images for formulae. E.g.

<dd><p>Replaces the columns of a dense complex matrix with their inverse
discrete Fourier transforms: if <code class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">X</span></code> has <img class="math" src="_images/math/e11f2701c4a39c7fe543a6c4150b421d50f1c159.png" alt="n"/> rows,</p>
<div class="math">
<p><img src="_images/math/ea898f4dc35c3010225ae66a6d7993bae88b3a56.png" alt="X[k,:] :=
    \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} e^{2\pi j k \sqrt{-1}/n} X[j,:],
    \qquad k=0,\ldots,n-1."/></p>
</div></dd></dl>

I don't know whether we should follow the suit, or leave it as it is, or make it use MathJax...

comment:76 Changed 4 months ago by dimpase

ping...

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.