-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 481
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
Move installation details from README to the installation guide #38659
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Move installation details from README to the installation guide #38659
Conversation
0463362
to
e55a675
Compare
Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit f04ce3f; changes) is ready! 🎉 |
f3ea24e
to
ccd9dca
Compare
b568039
to
4d0311d
Compare
4d0311d
to
285a6ad
Compare
Thanks for this initiative to make the README lighter! The Linux dependencies listed in the new README are outdated: the Basically, one should suppress A dependencies list that is known to work for Ubuntu 24.04 is posted at https://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr/install_ubuntu.html |
I think it can be omitted. I never used it myself. For me, |
Done. Thanks. |
Co-authored-by: Matthias Köppe <[email protected]>
Matthias, I fixed an error diff --git a/src/doc/bootstrap b/src/doc/bootstrap
index e99ecd52c28..256ba085e0b 100755
--- a/src/doc/bootstrap
+++ b/src/doc/bootstrap
- if [ -n "PKG_SYSTEM_PACKAGES" ]; then
+ if [ -n "$PKG_SYSTEM_PACKAGES" ]; then Perhaps this error was not noticed before because |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Awesome, this is a nice improvement! Thanks for the initiative.
I think one could even go a step further and extract all of the remaining install instructions in the readme to a "Install Quick Walkthrough" in the docs. So the readme just links to the docs. Similar to how its done in scipy/numpy.
src/doc/en/installation/index.rst
Outdated
:ref:`sec-installation-from-sources`. | ||
- Alternatively, follow the instructions in section | ||
:ref:`sec-installation-conda-develop`; | ||
these describe an experimental method that gets all required |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Conda is not experimental since a very long time.
Given the many (recent?) problems with installing various packages in sage-the-distro, conda should actually be mentioned first, and only then the installation from source. Would safe us a lot of headache.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't agree. Traditionally building from source is the main way of installing sage for developers.
But perhaps this may be debatable in sage-devel. If there is a consensus in favor of conda, then we may change this part later. But this is for another PR.
Not in scope of this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Making conda the default has been already discussed on the mailing list with only positive feedback (by people other than me): https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/AvH3xq2bCfo/m/OKwqzrrYCwAJ
In either way, this mode of installation is definitely not "experimental".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, I removed "experimental".
I don't mind whether conda is the default or not. I just don't want to make the changes here myself because I don't have much experience with conda and I am not sure if the change is desirable.
I would be happy if you make a followup PR just for the change.
- No development: **Do you have root access (sudo)?** | ||
- **I have root access (can use sudo command):** Then the easiest way to install Sage is | ||
through a Linux distribution that provides it as a package. Some | ||
Linux distributions have up-to-date versions of Sage, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this can be improved. Instead of sending people to repology, just name the very few distros (arch, gentoo) that actually have an up-to date version of sage. And given that this is not the case for the bigger players like ubuntu, I would put the conda install first again (as it will apply to most people).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sending people to repology seems better because it would have up to date information. If we hard-code them, it would be easily out of date.
I added
You may need to consider upgrading your Linux distribution because a recent
version of Sage is only available on a newer version of the distribution.
+ If there is no up-to-date version for your Linux distribution, you may
+ consider `conda`, as explained below.
+
instead of recommending conda first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sending people to repology seems better because it would have up to date information. If we hard-code them, it would be easily out of date.
Maybe do both? If you are on Gentoo or Arch Linux (or [any other distribution that provides an up-to-date Sage package](<link to repology>), then use your system package manager to install Sage. Otherwise ...
. This is definitely more user-friendly, which should be the major aim of these instructions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How can we be sure that Gentoo and Arch Linux will provide an up-to-date sage? Is Gentoo providing an up-to-date sage now? It is not in the current repology list.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How can we be sure that Gentoo and Arch Linux will provide an up-to-date sage?
If it's outdated, we need to update the recommendation. Same as for https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/installation/linux.html.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As said in the PR description, one of the goals is to make the instructions in the readme as stable as possible so that we could only focus on the main installation guide as update occasions arise.
That is not the aim of this PR. The aim is: README for quick walkthrough, installation guide for full details. I think the quick walkthrough is short enough to put in README. Most projects on github contain a simple installation guide in README. |
It's 6 screens long for me... what advantages do you see of having it in readme as opposed to the main documentation?
If we would have a "simple" installation method, I wouldn't mind having a short 3-line cmd in the readme... |
It would be still 6 screens long in the main documentation.
The advantage is "having it in readme". I hope that a newcomer visiting our github repo have the impression that installing sage is not difficult. Our main installation guide is very long and complicated because it has all details explained. I think just looking at the installation guide makes one discouraged. What is the advantage of moving it to the main documentation? Do you want readme to be one screen long? I don't. |
Just to make this clear, my proposal was to move the info that is now in the readme to a new page in the docs. So that it as short/uncomplicated as in the readme.
Automatic checks of links, consistent page layout with other install-related pages, possibility to use advanced features such as tabs, possibility to use semi-dynamic info (such as the auto-generated linux install commands), ... |
74471bc
to
b8499f0
Compare
As stated in the PR description, the aim of this PR is to simplify the instruction guide in readme. README.md is a file directly accessible from the source tree while the installation guide is built from the source tree. I am not sure if removing completely the installation guide from README.md is desirable. As I don't want to do that here, please create your own PR for that later. |
Instead of having two versions in the main installation guide, I hope that the detailed guide is cleaned up and updated. It is now messy and will still be so after this PR. |
Currently we have two docs for installation: README.md and the Sage Installation Guide. There are severe problems:
This PR aims to make README.md a light-weight easy-to-follow installation guide for newcomers and beginners trying to install Sage to their personal computers.
See the new README:
https://github.com/kwankyu/sage/tree/p/streamline-installation-guide#getting-started
The new README does not try to be comprehensive. That is the role of the Sage Installation Guide. Materials removed from README are incorporated to the Sage Installation Guide. The Sage Installation Guide would provide all the details for users for whom the README.md is not sufficient.
The installation guide in the README was tested with macOS, ubuntu, Windows WSL (ubuntu and fedora).
Along the way, I made extensive edits on the Sage Installation Guide. Most of them are non-technical.
See the new Sage Installation Guide:
https://doc-pr-38659--sagemath.netlify.app/html/en/installation/
In future, there would be little need to update the installation guide in README. Developers could focus only on updating the Sage Installation Guide as Sage evolves. This lessens maintenance burden.
📝 Checklist
⌛ Dependencies
#38676 to fix ci for doc preview