Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix tests in documentation after pynac printing changes #7659

Closed
burcin opened this issue Dec 11, 2009 · 9 comments
Closed

fix tests in documentation after pynac printing changes #7659

burcin opened this issue Dec 11, 2009 · 9 comments

Comments

@burcin
Copy link

burcin commented Dec 11, 2009

Attached patch fixes minor doctest errors in documentation caused by #7406 in 4.3.rc0.

Component: documentation

Author: Burcin Erocal

Reviewer: Alex Ghitza

Merged: sage-4.3.rc1

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/7659

@burcin
Copy link
Author

burcin commented Dec 11, 2009

Attachment: trac_7659-doctest_fixes.patch.gz

doctest fixes

@burcin
Copy link
Author

burcin commented Dec 11, 2009

Author: Burcin Erocal

@aghitza
Copy link

aghitza commented Dec 11, 2009

Reviewer: Alex Ghitza

@aghitza
Copy link

aghitza commented Dec 11, 2009

comment:2

Looks good and fixes the problems.

@mwhansen
Copy link
Contributor

Merged: sage-4.3.rc1

@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

comment:5

This is a duplicate of #7747 (or rather, #7747 is a duplicate of this one). The patch in #7747 does a little more; can we merge that one instead?

@burcin
Copy link
Author

burcin commented Dec 22, 2009

comment:6

Replying to @jhpalmieri:

This is a duplicate of #7747 (or rather, #7747 is a duplicate of this one). The patch in #7747 does a little more; can we merge that one instead?

AFAICT by looking at comment:3, this patch was merged. The patch on #7747 should be rebased in this case.

@mwhansen
Copy link
Contributor

comment:7

I've backed out this patch, and am merging the one at #7747 instead.

@burcin
Copy link
Author

burcin commented Dec 23, 2009

comment:8

I don't see why you couldn't just merge the patch at #7747 on top of this one, and ignored the failed hunks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants