Re: [OctDev] Octave-Forge bugs in the tracker?

[Carnë Draug]

On 9 September 2011 02:12, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden> wrote:
> Okay, wait. Objection, your honour. I want to raise again a couple of
> points (and sorry if I'm a little repetitive):
>
> 1) I'm tired of telling people that report 'Forge bugs to Octave that
>   they're doing something wrong. Staying in SF won't fix this.
>
> 2) Octave is GNU and Octave-Forge packages should also be as GNU as
>   possible. Call me whatever you want, but I'm a little uncomfortable
>   with SourceForge luring us with bells and whistles while not giving
>   us free tools:
>
>       http://mako.cc/writing/hill-free_tools.html
>
> I also don't like that I can't go and fix the minor bugs I find in
> Octave-Forge packages, but I guess that's just because I've gotten
> used to pushing my own patches on Octave and would like to do the same
> to 'Forge packages. I also don't like that we treat Windows and Mac OS
> X binaries as something "external" to Octave.
>
> Fine, I say we let Octave-Forge packages go in the non-GNU part of
> Savannah. We won't enforce GNU coding standards on them, nor any
> particular free license as long as it's GPL compatible. We can keep
> using svn because people are more comfortable with it. But at least
> bring them closer to Octave.

On 9 September 2011 02:12, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden> wrote:
> 2) Octave is GNU and Octave-Forge packages should also be as GNU as
>   possible. Call me whatever you want, but I'm a little uncomfortable
>   with SourceForge luring us with bells and whistles while not giving
>   us free tools:
>
>       http://mako.cc/writing/hill-free_tools.html

I agree with all (and specially like the part of using a host that
uses free software) that but there seems to be no people able to spend
the time and energy required to make the move. If the move is not
happening, we should at least try to start use SF better.

Carnë