Excise MoinMoin

[kini]

We should get rid of MoinMoin as a standard spkg. It is not used by anything in Sage AFAIK. (There has been some discussion about this on sage-devel.) In particular, there was a vote in which (as of March 28) no one objected to removing MoinMoin. There wasn't great consensus about what to do with the package afterwards, but making it "experimental" has support and seems like the right choice: then it is still available but no one has to commit to be the maintainer.

To apply:

• Remove the file spkg/standard/moin-1.9.1.p2.spkg.
• Apply attachment: trac_12713-root.patch to the root repository.
• Apply attachment: trac_12713-sage.patch and attachment: 12713-sage-review.patch to the Sage repository.
• Apply attachment: trac_12713-scripts.patch to the scripts repository.
• Apply attachment: trac_12713-sagenb.patch to the sagenb repository.

Depends on #10492
Depends on #12515

Component: packages: standard

Author: John Palmieri

Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer

Merged: sage-5.0.beta13

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12713

[jhpalmieri]

comment:2

For what it's worth, I removed the moin spkg and modified spkg/install and spkg/standard/deps in the obvious ways. Sage built and all tests passed.

[jhpalmieri]

Author: John Palmieri

[jhpalmieri]

comment:3

Here's a patch. If we go through with this, should we keep MoinMoin as an optional spkg? Probably we should.

[jhpalmieri]

root repo

[jhpalmieri]

comment:4

Attachment: trac_12713-moin.patch.gz

[jhpalmieri]

Dependencies: #10492

[nexttime]

comment:5

Replying to @jhpalmieri:

Here's a patch. If we go through with this, should we keep MoinMoin as an optional spkg? Probably we should.

Yes! (Make it an optional spkg.) Incidentally, that's what I was thinking of yesterday as well, and a couple of times before...

[jdemeyer]

comment:6

I guess this is something which should be discussed properly on sage-devel first...

[jdemeyer]

comment:8

There's slightly more to do: remove the sage -wiki command line option and remove some files related to Moin Moin Wiki in the Sage library (sorry, I haven't checked which files, but I'm sure there is something).

[jhpalmieri]

comment:9

Here are new patches.

[jhpalmieri]

root repo

[jhpalmieri]

Attachment: trac_12713-root.patch.gz

scripts repo

[jhpalmieri]

comment:10

Attachment: trac_12713-scripts.patch.gz

The Sage library patch conflicts somewhat with #11409. If #11409 is merged first, then the Sage library patch here may be ignored. If this is merged first, then #11409 will need rebasing.

[nexttime]

comment:11

Replying to @jdemeyer:

There's slightly more to do: remove the sage -wiki command line option and remove some files related to Moin Moin Wiki in the Sage library (sorry, I haven't checked which files, but I'm sure there is something).

Should we really remove all traces of MoinMoin (or any kind of wiki) from Sage?

If we keep it as an optional (or experimental) spkg, we could treat it as such, just like the others. I.e., just add checks whether it is present / installed, and give messages according to the result.

[kini]

comment:12

For an optional spkg, maybe, but do we really maintain (or need to maintain) library/interface support for experimental packages?

[nexttime]

comment:13

Replying to @kini:

For an optional spkg, maybe, but do we really maintain (or need to maintain) library/interface support for experimental packages?

Well, I don't have strong feelings about that, but probably there are Sage users out there who really used that stuff... :-)

[jhpalmieri]

comment:14

Since no one on sage-devel objected to the removal of MoinMoin, I think we can do this. If someone wants to restore the functionality, they can just restore the files from sage/server/wiki: that's the whole purpose of having a repository, right? The only other possibility, I think, is to not only add checks for the presence of the package, but also to add doctests to the file sage/server/wiki/moin.py. Removing the files is by far the path of least resistance. Oh, Leif, unless you're volunteering...

[jdemeyer]

comment:15

Replying to @jhpalmieri:

The Sage library patch conflicts somewhat with #11409. If #11409 is merged first, then the Sage library patch here may be ignored. If this is merged first, then #11409 will need rebasing.

It is unlikely that #11409 will get merged any time soon (unfortunately).

[jdemeyer]

Changed dependencies from #10492 to #10492, #12515

[jdemeyer]

comment:17

The file

doc/en/reference/networking.rst

should also be removed, and index.rst modified accordingly.

[jhpalmieri]

comment:18

Okay, here's a new patch which does that.

[jhpalmieri]

Sage library

[jhpalmieri]

comment:19

Attachment: trac_12713-sage.patch.gz

Do we also need a patch for sagenb, removing sagenb/notebook/wiki2html.py? Here is one.

[jhpalmieri]

sagenb

[jdemeyer]

comment:20

Attachment: trac_12713-sagenb.patch.gz

You forgot this (sage library):

diff --git a/setup.py b/setup.py
--- a/setup.py
+++ b/setup.py
@@ -1008,7 +1008,6 @@
                      'sage.server.simple',
                      'sage.server.notebook',
                      'sage.server.notebook.compress',
-                     'sage.server.wiki',
                      'sage.server.trac',

                      'sage.structure',

[jdemeyer]

Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer

[jdemeyer]

comment:21

positive_review if setup.py is fixed.

[jdemeyer]

comment:22

Attachment: 12713-sage-review.patch.gz

[jhpalmieri]

comment:23

Thank you for taking care of that last piece.

[jdemeyer]

Merged: sage-5.0.beta13