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

consider moving some extensions to separate libraries #1032

Open
isaacsas opened this issue Aug 27, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

consider moving some extensions to separate libraries #1032

isaacsas opened this issue Aug 27, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member

Issues like https://github.com/SciML/Catalyst.jl/actions/runs/10549534673/job/29224675728?pr=961 are due to some of the extension libraries we depend on not updating to newer (breaking) releases of packages. In this case I think Homotopy continuation, see JuliaHomotopyContinuation/HomotopyContinuation.jl#581, still being on Arblib .8 instead of 1.X is going to block us from updating DynamicPolynomials, but ultimately Symbolics too (which now also requires DynamicPolynmials 6). Note that this isn't an issue with Arblib just recently making a breaking release, v1.0 came out 10 months ago.

It seems like we might want to move such extensions to be separate libraries (i.e. CatalystHomotopyContinuation or such), which would at least allow Catalyst to get updated for everyone that doesn't need to load HomotopyContinuation.

@SciML SciML deleted a comment from GoldenCaterpie Aug 27, 2024
@PBrdng
Copy link

PBrdng commented Aug 28, 2024

Hi, the problem here is that using Arblib 1.0 or newer causes some of the crucial tests in HomotopyContinuation to fail. I'm on it, but I don't know how long it will take to fix this. Sorry!!

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member Author

No worries, and thanks for looking into it!

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

We can probably relax the DynamicPolynomials. The sad thing is then you'll have a Pkg dependency with DynamicPolynomials v5

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member Author

This may all be indicative that we should split off a Catalyst core at some point.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants