octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: policy for release branch


From: Daniel J Sebald
Subject: Re: policy for release branch
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:36:24 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041020

Robert T. Short wrote:

As far as octave with gnuplot, I really liked the old gplot interface.

I liked it too.  That's why I advocated some type of similar hidden function as 
part of the matryoshka pointers interface.

I do like the MATLAB compatibility, but I thought gset/gplot, etc. was an awesome plot interface. Not perfect, lots of warts, but *I* loved it. I don't care about all the fancy plot features MATLAB offers. I need plots that look nice, and if I need to add annotations, I simply dump it in "fig" format and fire up xfig.

I do that too sometimes.


I just wrote a chapter in a recently published book and by golly the figures looked almighty professional!

To me, that is where it counts, the final document.


Octave became very robust about five years ago. John always seemed to put crash bugs at top priority when they were reported, and I think he gradually did some code restructuring and improvement.

Yes, but the point is that most people aren't willing to put up with the apparent complexity of linux/octave.

That's why bugginess in releases isn't good.  People jump to conclude from one 
or two small bugs that the whole program is bugs; need some basis to make 
judgement I suppose.


You are. I am. I can't even begin to understand why people use Windows on purpose, but they do. Maybe it is the fluff factor - maybe people really like little paper clips that supposedly help. I would prefer to see those resources applied to making solid software, but people seem to want fluff.

Part of it is cultural, e.g., the "professional" aspect of licensed software.

Dan


reply via email to

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