Re: Better name for ROADMAP?

[John W. Eaton]

On 12-Jan-2011, Rik wrote:

| John W. Eaton wrote:
| > On 10-Jan-2011, Rik wrote:
| > 
| > | I just updated the file ROADMAP in the toplevel directory which is a guide
| > | to the directory structure of the source code.  Is there a better name 
than
| > | ROADMAP which makes me think that this is a list of goals for future 
releases?
| > 
| > How about merging it with the HACKING file?
| 
| And what about README.devel?  Should all 3 files be merged into a guide on
| working with the raw source code?  Or are the development releases such as
| 3.3.54 different enough (no requirement for gnulib, Mercurial) that they
| get their own file.

README.devel is not supposed to be distributed in the tar files with
Octave.  It is, like README.mirrors and maybe some other files,
intended to be placed on the ftp site where we distribute Octave.
Maybe that distinction would be more clear if we placed these files in
a separate directory.

If we have a more complete HACKING file, then the README.devel file
could be shortened by not including directions for submitting patches,
etc., but just explain the purpose of development shapshots and then
point to the HACKING file.

Probably README.devel is not even being used now on alpha.gnu.org,
where future development snapshots will be distributed.

jwe