octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: branching for release?


From: Judd Storrs
Subject: Re: branching for release?
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 16:39:41 -0500

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 3:58 PM, logari81 <address@hidden> wrote:
Concerning the replacement of "backend" I don't have any fixed opinion.
Concerning replacing "fltk" I would vote against "fltk_opengl", I would
prefer one of "fltk" or "opengl".

I imagine external graphical interfaces would use also use their own names. So, I propose:

backend -> "graphics"
fltk -> "internal"

For example, it seems clear to me that "graphics gnuplot" uses gnuplot. If qtoctave had it's own backend I imagine it would be enabled by "graphics qtoctave", etc. I think calling the fltk backend "graphics octave" would be confusing though--that's why I propose "graphics internal".


--judd

reply via email to

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