[Axiom-developer] Re: Version numbers

[Bill Page]

On 6/25/07, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> ...
> I do not believe your posting was a waste -- although a patch to
> Axiom with equialvent size would have been nice :-) :-)
> ...

Thank you for comments and I agree with your sentiment above.

> Bill Page wrote:
> | Since I have been promoting the autoconf style of build process for
> | Axiom to Tim for several years, Tim asked me why I did not do this
> | work myself. I replied that I was very glad when someone came along
> | (Gaby) who was motivated and obviously knew enough about how to do it
> | - much more than me! The situation is that really I do not want to be
> | doing this kind of development. Since I am not very good at it, it
> | wastes my time and there is never enough time. I would very much
> | prefer to be an Axiom user/developer who discusses mathematics and
> | writes new algebra code for example in category theory and in
> | applications to physics. But here I have been stuck for nearly 5 years
> | now - just getting to the point where this is becoming possible.
>
>
> I very much disagree with that view. I too would very much perfer to be
> an Axiom user/developer who discusses mathematics and write algebra code for
> example in category theory and applications to various fields of
> computational science.  However, I also realize that I cannot just wish
> someone else come and does the dirty job for me so that I can theorize without
> getting my hands dirt.  I'm not a developer.  I'm a mathematician.
> I earned my degree in Differential Geometry.  I'm highly interested
> in computational mathematics.  Since *I need tools* and they are lacking, I
> have to build them.  That is why I have my hands dirt with C++, GCC, Axiom,
> etc.

Your point well taken. I realize that what you say is completely true
and applies to many other people on this list. I agree that the
attitude that I displayed in my comment above is *not* a productive
one. Instead I should point out that I have learned a lot about how to
use autoconf from your work on build-improvements. It is not my
intention to simply "just wish that someone else come and does the
dirty job for me" - certainly not at the expense of their own time
which they really wish to devote to something else. Perhaps I can make
some significant contribution in the future. In the mean time I am at
least attempting to test these changes as widely and as often as
possible.

> ...
> | > > > Bill Page wrote:
> | > > > (See for example recent revisions submitted by Gaby which he asked
> | > > > to revert pending something similar to be done by Tim.)
> | >
> Bill Page wrote:
> | I think Tim's reply to this is very important.
> |
> | He said that he had planned to work with the change that Gaby had
> | submitted and the fact that Gaby later withdrew it was *not* based
> | on his request.
>
> That is true: Tim never asked me to back off the change I made.
> The complain came from more vocal people who did not take any step in
> solving the problem I was attempting to solve.  I guess solving the problem
> they thought I erroneously solved would have been against the law.
>
> | (Check the mailing list). He said that I should get your facts
> | straight when you are making disparaging remarks about him in public.
>
> Is "you" referring to me (Gaby)?

No sorry, that is my grammatical error. I should have written:

 He (Tim) said that *I* (Bill) should get my facts straight when I am
 making disparaging remarks about him in public.

> Bill Page wrote:
> | I am very sorry about this. I do hereby state publicly that I was
> | wrong about that. I also get the impression that there were more
> | people than me who may have gotten the wrong impression about that
> | interchange so I am glad that Tim has set the record straight.
> ...

Regards,
Bill Page.