Opened 5 years ago
Last modified 3 weeks ago
#21170 new enhancement
package pypolymake
Reported by:  mkoeppe  Owned by:  

Priority:  major  Milestone:  sage9.4 
Component:  packages: experimental  Keywords:  
Cc:  vdelecroix, dimpase, mkoeppe, chapoton, kcrisman, tscrim, SimonKing, ghkliem  Merged in:  
Authors:  Matthias Koeppe  Reviewers:  
Report Upstream:  N/A  Work issues:  
Branch:  u/mkoeppe/pypolymake (Commits, GitHub, GitLab)  Commit:  565d6de06d28cbf02e91d2bdba46c6f62a68b2dd 
Dependencies:  Stopgaps: 
Description (last modified by )
 development at https://gitlab.com/videlec/pypolymake
 (old) tarballs at https://github.com/videlec/pypolymake/releases
 PyPI page at https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pypolymake/
See also: #22710: Metaticket: polymake
Change History (26)
comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by
 Branch set to u/mkoeppe/pypolymake
comment:2 in reply to: ↑ description Changed 5 years ago by
 Commit set to e6b22d3b48d040c3d37e5bd1877f125f6312c4f3
comment:3 Changed 5 years ago by
Branch is on top of #20892.
comment:4 Changed 5 years ago by
 Cc kcrisman tscrim added
comment:5 Changed 5 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
comment:6 Changed 5 years ago by
 Commit changed from e6b22d3b48d040c3d37e5bd1877f125f6312c4f3 to 77014a17e07a55196e32d93e740f85b9909ccfde
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. Last 10 new commits:
8798d7d  Merge tag '7.3' into t/20892/20892

3837a48  bliss: Use autotoolized package from Debian

225755e  bliss: Add more info in SPKG.txt

4b22211  bliss: Use upstream tarball and patches

3111091  Merge tag '7.3.beta9' into t/20901/upgrade_bliss_package_to_0_73_with_debian_patches__install_header_files_in_location_expected_by_polymake

1c398a3  Merge tag '7.3.rc0' into t/20901/upgrade_bliss_package_to_0_73_with_debian_patches__install_header_files_in_location_expected_by_polymake

1d2707c  Use repackaged archive instead of huge patch

c0c0427  Adjust to changed bliss header file locations

7b096fd  Merge branch 't/20901/upgrade_bliss_package_to_0_73_with_debian_patches__install_header_files_in_location_expected_by_polymake' into t/20892/20892

77014a1  Merge branch 't/20892/20892' into t/21170/pypolymake

comment:7 Changed 5 years ago by
 Commit changed from 77014a17e07a55196e32d93e740f85b9909ccfde to b699fb79e0348d9a4d4bae187fa7109644045f4f
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
b699fb7  Merge tag '7.4.beta1' into t/21170/pypolymake

comment:8 Changed 5 years ago by
 Commit changed from b699fb79e0348d9a4d4bae187fa7109644045f4f to dfa9b01e2c443f7a097299d6e121884c3c62deb6
comment:9 Changed 4 years ago by
 Cc SimonKing added
comment:10 Changed 4 years ago by
What is the status? Should it be reviewed? Does it need work?
comment:11 followup: ↓ 12 Changed 4 years ago by
I am not happy with pypolymake (which is in beta version)... I am hoping to get something reasonable at sage days 84.
You can already install it in sage through PyPI
$ sage pip install pypolymake
and even the development version with
$ sage pip install git+https://github.com/videlec/pypolymake.git
(it does not work for everybody, including me right now)
comment:12 in reply to: ↑ 11 ; followup: ↓ 13 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
I am hoping to get something reasonable at sage days 84.
I thought so...
BTW, I'll try to create a pexpect interface to polymake, see #22452. I guess having Python bindings and a pexpect interface at the same time (similar to having libsingular and the Singular pexpect interface) would be a good argument for making Polymake a standard package.
comment:13 in reply to: ↑ 12 ; followup: ↓ 14 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
Replying to vdelecroix:
I am hoping to get something reasonable at sage days 84.
I thought so...
BTW, I'll try to create a pexpect interface to polymake, see #22452. I guess having Python bindings and a pexpect interface at the same time (similar to having libsingular and the Singular pexpect interface) would be a good argument for making Polymake a standard package.
To my mind, polymake is too fragile (and too big) to become standard, or even optional.
comment:14 in reply to: ↑ 13 ; followup: ↓ 15 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
To my mind, polymake is too fragile (and too big)
Is "big" a problem? In what sense is it fragile? Does Polymake change its API very often? Does it have too many serious bugs to be useful? Till now, I didn't have that impression, but perhaps I didn't use Polymake intensely enough.
comment:15 in reply to: ↑ 14 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
Replying to vdelecroix:
To my mind, polymake is too fragile (and too big)
Is "big" a problem?
It does not seem to be that big. However compilation takes a lot of time.
In what sense is it fragile?
This is a more serious issue: compilation is fragile. You need a working perl environment which are configured differently on different computers. See for example this sagedevel thread.
Does Polymake change its API very often? Does it have too many serious bugs to be useful? Till now, I didn't have that impression, but perhaps I didn't use Polymake intensely enough.
No polymake is a very neat software! Only installation is delicate.
comment:16 Changed 4 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
 Milestone changed from sage7.4 to sage8.0
comment:17 Changed 4 years ago by
Notice: I just updated pypolymake to work with polymake 3.1 (and removed the "beta" branch on github)
comment:18 Changed 14 months ago by
 Milestone changed from sage8.0 to sage9.2
Moving some tickets to 9.2. This is not a promise that I will be working on them.
comment:19 Changed 10 months ago by
 Milestone changed from sage9.2 to sage9.3
comment:20 Changed 4 months ago by
 Milestone changed from sage9.3 to sage9.4
Setting new milestone based on a cursory review of ticket status, priority, and last modification date.
comment:21 Changed 3 weeks ago by
 Cc ghkliem added
 Description modified (diff)
comment:22 Changed 3 weeks ago by
 Commit changed from dfa9b01e2c443f7a097299d6e121884c3c62deb6 to b4eb13a705340a52ab5c6a564abff86df86e111f
comment:23 Changed 3 weeks ago by
 Commit changed from b4eb13a705340a52ab5c6a564abff86df86e111f to 565d6de06d28cbf02e91d2bdba46c6f62a68b2dd
comment:24 Changed 3 weeks ago by
...local/include/polymake/AnyString.h:43:9: error: delegating constructors are permitted only in C++11
Need to switch on std=c++11 somewhere
comment:25 Changed 3 weeks ago by
 Dependencies #20892 deleted
comment:26 Changed 3 weeks ago by
 Description modified (diff)
Note, the package currently is a "script" package whose
spkginstall
calls "pip". Can't make it a "pip" package at the moment because some environment variables need to be set.Last 10 new commits:
polymake build: disable fink
Merge tag '7.3.beta9' into t/20892/20892
Use withoutfink only on Mac OS X
pypolymake package
Update polymake to 3.0r2
Handle errors. Remove old installation before installing
Run polymake reconfigure
Fixup "arch" flags on Mac OS X. Increase verbosity
Remove pypolymake package for now
Revert "Remove pypolymake package for now"