[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Axiom-developer] [Award Of Bounties] (new)

From: billpage
Subject: [Axiom-developer] [Award Of Bounties] (new)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:01:19 -0500

Bounties: --
  relatively small promotional awards to be paid for programming
  work done to enhance Axiom.

Submissions will be accepted on an "as is" basis. It should be
very clear whether a submission fulfils a specific requirement
or not. A good example would be a MS Windows port of axiom:
The requirements would be (roughly):

* that axiom can be compiled according to step by step instructions

* passes "most" of the tests -- there might be some platform 
  specific problems, of course, like pathnames and the like

* and the changes are documented.

Similarly, a bounty could be awarded for an SBCL port, when Axiom
actually compiles in this environmnet.

Special awards will be granted for especially good work.

In fact, there are quite a few tasks where a simple operational
result would already be great: pamphlet support on MathAction,
a Windows port, an SBCL or CMUCL port, compiling domains with Aldor,

The individual items from the WishList and [Summer Of Code] are possible
items for awards.

Here the current proposals:

|Windows port                    | 50$ |
|pamphlet support for MathAction | 50$ |
|CMUCL/SBCL port                 |100$ |
|Aldor                           |200$ |
Note that we really have *no* idea how much work these items 
represent although you can be sure that their value to users
of Axiom is far beyond 200$. That is way we refer to a bounty
as an "award" and not as a payment for work accomplished.

<em>**Sidenote**: Many great mathematicians set out prices for proofs 
of conjectures they had. Best known are probably the prices of
Paul Erdös.  These prices ranged from 10$ (difficult problem)
to (I think) 500$ (only for genius)...</em>

In this spirit, we might set up a second row of bounties, like:

|implementing Zeilberger                                                   | 5$ 
|fixing bug #191 exquo and therefore gcd cannot handle UP(x, EXPR INT)     | 5$ 

based on an email from::

  Martin Rubey
  Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:29 AM

**Subject to change without notice.**

forwarded from

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]