octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: A group in Norway starts to develop support for multidimensional arr


From: Joao Cardoso
Subject: Re: A group in Norway starts to develop support for multidimensional arrays in Octave.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 15:44:48 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.5.1

On Friday 20 June 2003 02:39, John W. Eaton wrote:
|  On 20-Jun-2003, Joao Cardoso <address@hidden> wrote:
|  | And some distributors also. Octave is not available under SuSE since
|  | SuSE-8.0; the problem, I think, is that the stable octave version
|  | can't be compiled with the shipped gcc.
|
|  I think this has changed.  Although it doesn't show up in the
|  package database on their web site, someone told me that it is on the
|  latest CD.  I see an RPM file for 2.1.44 on one of their ftp mirrors.

It is not in the sold CDs, which I have on line. SuSE-8.0 had octave-2.0.16, 
but it disappeared in 8.1 and 8.2.

|  The problem with making a stable release is that I don't want to waste
|  my time patching it with fixes that I have already made to the
|  development version.  I tried that before and it didn't work for me.
|  It took too much energy to keep up with fixes for the stable release.
|  After only a short while it was not nearly as simple as making diffs
|  from the development CVS and applying them to the stable sources.  If
|  someone good would seriously consider taking over a stable release,
|  then I would consider it.  I have asked in the past, but no one
|  volunteered.  Maybe things are different now.  If so, and you would be
|  interested in this job, then speak up.

I don't have the knowledge/skill.

|  Otherwise, there is no way I
|  plan to do it.  I don't see the point of having a particular version
|  frozen and called stable when it might have serious bugs that would
|  never be fixed in an updated release.
|
|  Another possiblity is to do away with the 2.0.x series and just have
|  one.  It would not be labeled "stable" or "development" or anything
|  else.  Then if you want Octave, you get the latest version.  We would
|  make releases when we felt comfortable that things were mostly OK and
|  people who want to work with the latest sources would use CVS.

I only see people complaining for bugs in the mailing lists after a release; 
cvs is seldom used, so I'm afraid this would not work.
Instead, keep releasing as you do now, and after a couple of weeks of 
releasing what looks to be a stable release, tag it as WPW, "works pretty 
well".

Joao


|
|  jwe



reply via email to

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