Make libhomfly and libbraiding standard packages.

[miguelmarco]

As was discussed in https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-devel/9BhrS2J4oE8 these two packages have been optional for over a year. They provide useful methods for braids and links.

CC: @tscrim @jdemeyer

Component: packages: standard

Keywords: days94

Author: Miguel Marco

Branch: 456cb3c

Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer, Travis Scrimshaw

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/25705

[miguelmarco]

Branch: u/mmarco/make_libhomfly_and_libbraiding_standard_packages_

[miguelmarco]

Commit: 34542a4

[miguelmarco]

New commits:

34542a4

Make libbraiding and libhomfly standard packages

[jdemeyer]

Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer

[sagetrac-git]

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

456cb3c

Remove optional tag from some doctests, and warnings

[sagetrac-git]

Changed commit from 34542a4 to 456cb3c

[tscrim]

comment:5

Since the vote was 2:0 for inclusion with no objections, I would say we should change this to a positive review.

[miguelmarco]

Changed reviewer from Jeroen Demeyer to Jeroen Demeyer, Travis Scrimshaw

[vbraun]

Changed branch from u/mmarco/make_libhomfly_and_libbraiding_standard_packages_ to 456cb3c

[timokau]

Changed commit from 456cb3c to none

[timokau]

comment:8

In the future, I'd appreciate if you could cross-post such a vote to sage-packaging. No accusation, just a friendly request :)

I now have to package these two libraries for nix. Questions:

• where is the source for libbraiding 1.0 coming from? I'm assuming its from https://github.com/miguelmarco/libbraiding/, but I don't see any tagged 1.0 release or a linked distribution tarball there.
• why are we using this fork instead of any other? The jeanluct has more recent commits for example. Since you're apparently the author I'm sure you have good reasons, but you should document them.

[miguelmarco]

comment:9

Replying to @timokau:

In the future, I'd appreciate if you could cross-post such a vote to sage-packaging. No accusation, just a friendly request :)

Ok, I will try to remember that the next time.

I now have to package these two libraries for nix. Questions:

• where is the source for libbraiding 1.0 coming from? I'm assuming its from https://github.com/miguelmarco/libbraiding/, but I don't see any tagged 1.0 release or a linked distribution tarball there.

Yes, the source is taken from the github repo (I know the correct way to do would be to create a release... Add it to my to-do list)

• why are we using this fork instead of any other? The jeanluct has more recent commits for example. Since you're apparently the author I'm sure you have good reasons, but you should document them.

jeanluct's repo contains a command line program (braiding). libbraiding is not a command line program, but a library that exposes the functions to be used by other programs.

[timokau]

comment:10

Replying to @miguelmarco:

I now have to package these two libraries for nix. Questions:

• where is the source for libbraiding 1.0 coming from? I'm assuming its from https://github.com/miguelmarco/libbraiding/, but I don't see any tagged 1.0 release or a linked distribution tarball there.

Yes, the source is taken from the github repo (I know the correct way to do would be to create a release... Add it to my to-do list)

Ah okay, makes sense. I think you should add that explanation to the README sentence where you mention its a fork.

• why are we using this fork instead of any other? The jeanluct has more recent commits for example. Since you're apparently the author I'm sure you have good reasons, but you should document them.

jeanluct's repo contains a command line program (braiding). libbraiding is not a command line program, but a library that exposes the functions to be used by other programs.

Could you please do that soon? Just add a 1.0 tag to github. Shouldn't take more than a minute. Its not very nice to package something without an offical source.

[miguelmarco]

comment:11

I created the release in github. However, the tarball that you will get there does not coincide with the one in the sage repo, since the later is constructed from the former by autotools.

[timokau]

comment:12

Thank you. That is no problem, we can just run autotools ourselves in the build scripts. I prefer that anyways (I feel like the generated makefiles and configure scripts are close to distributed binaries).

[embray]

comment:13

Can we please retarget tickets' milestones either before a milestone is marked completed, or shortly thereafter (or at least certainly before closing a ticket...)?